From: wolda002@umn.edu
Date: Wed Aug 19 2009 - 23:16:22 EDT
Axis of Logic
Finding Clarity in the 21st Century Mediaplex
Critical Analysis
A look at the past informs the present: The murder of Rafik al-Hariri
By Joe Quinn
Signs of the Times
Sunday, Aug 16, 2009
Editor's note: This analysis of the murder of Rafik al-Hariri in Lebanon
was first published on February 15, 2005. It is offered here as an example
and reminder of Israel's capacity for ongoing false flag operations and
mass murder in their quest to destroy neighboring Arab countries realise a
"Greater Israel".
- Les Blough, Editor
Mossad Murders Former Lebanese PM in Carbon Copy of 1979 Assassination
Rafik al-Hariri with his wife Nazek
We can only conclude that there must be some kind of agreement between
world nations that, even when it is patantly obvious, one nation will never
expose the activities of anothers' intelligence agency. What other reason
can there be for the fact that Iran and Syria were the only two countries
to even hint at Israel as being behind the murder of Rafik Hariri on
Valentine's day 2005?
Indeed, one of the strongest indications of an Israeli involvement in the
murder of Hariri is the fact that not ONE mainstream news source is even
mentioning the possibility of Israeli involvement, when it is painfully
clear that Israel has the most to gain from his death. But then again, we
have become accustomed to the severe lack of intestinal fortitude or any
real journalistic integrity on the part of the mainstream media. And also
to the fact that much of the Western press is dominated by Israeli
sympathisers and/or "Zionists".
To his credit, French President Chirac, perhaps going as far as protocol
permitted, held off from immediately implicating any particular group in
the murder of his close friend and called for "an immediate international
investigation to uncover the real culprits". Coming as it did at the same
time as the US government's attempts to force the blame on Syria, Chirac's
comment perhaps provides the strongest evidence that Syria was NOT
involved. Of course, we don't need the subtle innuendo of any government
leader to realise that, while Syria may have stood to gain from the
untimely demise of Hariri, it had much more to loose.
This fact however did not stop so-called "journalists" in the mainstream
media from sounding off in all directions. An example of the faulty logic
used by such pundits is provided by analyst Jean-Pierre Perrin writing in
the French daily "Liberation" the day after the assassination of Hariri.
Perrin claimed that Chirac's call for an international enquiry to identify
the killers was "a way of casting doubt over any Lebanese-Syrian enquiry"
and showed Paris also suspects Damascus. Yet surely if Chirac really
suspected Syria, he would have said nothing and allowed Syria's accusers to
prevail, or added his own voice to the chorus already calling for Syrian
"blood". Yet we see that he did exactly the opposite and in doing so made
clear his opinion that Syria was NOT to blame.
Most readers will be aware that, over the past few years, the US and Israel
have been making loud and repeated claims that Syria is "funding
Palestinian and Iraqi terrorism". There have also been growing signs that,
if the US and Israel can fabricate enough "evidence", Syria may well be the
next stop in the "war on terror". It is also public knowledge that Hariri
had resigned as Prime Minister last year over Syrian meddling in Lebanese
government affairs and was in favor of a withdrawal of the 14,000 Syrian
troops from Lebanon (although he had never openly criticised the Syrian
government.) Given these facts, is it really reasonable to believe that
Syria would publically assassinate Hariri and, in the process, provide the
US and Israel with much needed justification to continue their imperial
rampage through the Middle East?
While Hariri might have been quietly pressuring Syria for the ultimate
removal of it's troops, he was also well aware of the reason for those
troops - to dissuade Israel from staging another invasion of Lebanese
territory. Having manipulated Lebanese and world opinion into believing
that Syria killed Hariri and with the withdrawal of Syrian troops already
under way, Lebanon and its people will once more be exposed to the
predations of the butcher Sharon.
>From the moment of its creation by Western diplomats in the aftermath of WW
I, the potential for religious and ethnic conflict was seemingly built into
the very fabric of Lebanese society. Under the gerrymandered borders drawn
up by the League of Nations in 1920, extremist Maronite Christians made up
54% of the population with Arabs comprising the remainder, giving the
Maronites a controlling stake in the newly formed Lebanese government.
Within 40 years however, Arabs had outnumbered Christians and hundreds of
thousands of Palestinian refugees had been forced out of Palestine into
Lebanon after the creation of the state of Israel in 1948 and the 1967
Israeli-Arab war. In an attempt to maintain control the Lebanese 'Phalange'
was formed, an extremist political and military force of the Christian
Maronites in Lebanon. The Phalangists' unbending right-wing policies, their
resistance to the introduction of fully democratic institutions and to the
very idea of Arab nationalism made them natural allies of Israel.
Almost inevitably, civil war between the Arab Lebanese and the Phalangists
finally broke out in 1975, with more than a little help from Israel. In
1982, under the pretext of curbing attacks on Israeli troops by the
Palestinian PLO in Lebanon, Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin ordered
the Israeli army to invade. In a weeklong orgy of bloodletting, then
Defence Minister and current Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon ordered
his troops to encircle the Lebanese refugee camps of Sabra and Shatila
giving the Maronite Phalangists free reign to murder at will. Figures vary,
but somewhere between 1,700 and 3,000 Palestinians, most of them innocent
civlians, were mercilessly butchered in response to the murder of
Israeli-backed Christian Lebanese President-elect Bashir Gemayel.
When a horrified world demanded an explanation of Israeli Prime Minister
Menachem Begin, who himself had committed indiscriminate terror in his
youth, he said without a word of regret: "Goyim kill Goyim and they blame
the Jew."
Despite Israel's denials of responsibility, New York Times correspondent
Thomas L. Friedman declared without qualification: "The Israelis knew just
what they were doing when they let the Phalangists into those camps."
Sharon and seven other Israeli officials, including Begin, were found
guilty the next year by an Israeli commission of "indirect responsibility"
for the massacres. Sharon was also found to have "personal responsibility,"
and he was ordered to resign or be removed as defense minister. Sharon
resigned, protesting his innocence, but he was allowed to stay in the
cabinet as a minister without portfolio.
The union of the Christian Lebanese and the Israelis has indeed been a long
and sordid one and it should come as no surprise that current Lebanese
Christian politicians have been quick to join the US and Israel in
immediately asserting that Syria was to blame for the murder of Hariri.
By all accounts, Hariri was one of the few "men of peace" left in the
Middle East. In his two terms as Lebanese PM since 1990, he had brought
Lebanon out of the carnage wrought by 15 years of civil war and set it well
on the way to reclaiming its status as the "Paris of the Middle East."
Hariri willingly expended his personal fortune on Lebanon's recovery
pouring millions into the reconstruction of Beirut. Viewed as a leading
Arab-world reformer, he was also credited with restoring Lebanon's
reputation abroad as a liberal, open Middle Eastern country. He paid for
the 1989 Christian-Muslim peace conference in Taif, Saudi Arabia, which
laid the foundation for the ceasefire that came a year later. During his
tenure as Prime Minister, Harari also made it his goal to ensure that the
religious divisions (Christian and Islamic) were kept out of politics.
When you think of Israel, what are the first thoughts that come to mind?
Belagured? Threatened? Only democracy in the Middle East? A vanguard for
Western Democracy in its battle to stem the tide of rampant Arab terrorism?
Rightful homeland of all "Jews"? If these thoughts come to mind when you
think of the state of Israel, then the IDF and/or the Mossad have an
opening you might be interested in. My point is that Israel, in its current
incarnation as an illegal and ultimately untenable statelet, far from
seeking the eradication of "terrorism", finds itself in the paradoxical
postion of NEEDING a permanent threat to its existence in order for it to
continue to exist and expand its borders into Arab lands.
Which is where the Israeli intelligence agency Mossad comes in.
Mossad's motto is "by way of deception thou shalt wage war" and all of the
evidence points to their taking their motto absolutely literally. Over the
years, Mossad has worked tirelessly to further the 'interests' of Israel
and has made extensive use of False Flag operations to create the
appearance that Israel is surrounded by terrorist regimes. From the
demonisation of Saddam leading up to the first Gulf War, to the 9/11
attacks, nothing, it seems, is a bridge too far for the world's most
ruthless and bloodthirsty intelligence agency.
>From ex-Mossad agent Victor Ostrovsky's book "The Other Side of Deception":
The Mossad realized that it had to come up with a new threat to the region,
a threat of such magnitude that it would justify whatever action the Mossad
might see fit to take.
The right-wing elements in the Mossad (and in the whole country, for that
matter) had what they regarded as a sound philosophy: They believed
(correctly, as it happened) that Israel was the strongest military presence
in the Middle East. In fact, they believed that the military might of what
had become known as "fortress Israel" was greater than that of all of the
Arab armies combined, and was responsible for whatever security Israel
possessed. The right wing believed then - and they still believe - that
this strength arises from the need to answer the constant threat of war.
The corollary belief was that peace overtures would inevitably start a
process of corrosion that would weaken the military and eventually bring
about the demise of the state of Israel, since, the philosophy goes, its
Arab neighbors are untrustworthy, and no treaty signed by them is worth the
paper it's written on.
Supporting the radical elements of Muslim fundamentalism sat well with the
Mossad's general plan for the region. An Arab world run by fundamentalists
would not be a party to any negotiations with the West, thus leaving Israel
again as the only democratic, rational country in the region. And if the
Mossad could arrange for the Hamas (Palestinian fundamentalists) to take
over the Palestinian streets from the PLO, then the picture would be
complete.
The Mossad regarded Saddam Hussein as their biggest asset in the area,
since he was totally irrational as far as international politics was
concerned, and was therefore all the more likely to make a stupid move that
the Mossad could take advantage of.
What the Mossad really feared was that Iraq's gigantic army, which had
survived the Iran-Iraq war and was being supplied by the West and financed
by Saudi Arabia, would fall into the hands of a leader who might be more
palatable to the West and still be a threat to Israel.
The first step was taken in November 1988, when the Mossad told the Israeli
foreign office to stop all talks with the Iraqis regarding a peace front.
At that time, secret negotiations were taking place between Israelis,
Jordanians, and Iraqis under the auspices of the Egyptians and with the
blessings of the French and the Americans. The Mossad manipulated it so
that Iraq looked as if it were the only country unwilling to talk, thereby
convincing the Americans that Iraq had a different agenda.
By January 1989, the Mossad LAP machine was busy portraying Saddam as a
tyrant and a danger to the world. The Mossad activated every asset it had,
in every place possible, from volunteer agents in Amnesty International to
fully bought members of the U.S. Congress. Saddam had been killing his own
people, the cry went; what could his enemies expect? The gruesome photos of
dead Kurdish mothers clutching their dead babies after a gas attack by
Saddam's army were real, and the acts were horrendous. But the Kurds were
entangled in an all-out guerrilla war with the regime in Baghdad and had
been supported for years by the Mossad, who sent arms and advisers to the
mountain camps of the Barazany family; this attack by the Iraqis could
hardly be called an attack on their own people. But, as Uri said to me,
once the orchestra starts to play, all you can do is hum along.
The media was supplied with inside information and tips from reliable
sources on how the crazed leader of Iraq killed people with his bare hands
and used missiles to attack Iranian cities. What they neglected to tell the
media was that most of the targeting for the missiles was done by the
Mossad with the help of American satellites. The Mossad was grooming Saddam
for a fall, but not his own. They wanted the Americans to do the work of
destroying that gigantic army in the Iraqi desert so that Israel would not
have to face it one day on its own border. That in itself was a noble cause
for an Israeli, but to endanger the world with the possibility of global
war and the deaths of thousands of Americans was sheer madness.
The previous august (1989) a contingent of the Maktal (Mossad
reconnaissance unit) and several naval commandos had headed up the
Euphrates, their target was an explosives factory located in the city of
Al-Iskandariah. Information the Mossad had received from American
intelligence revealed that every thursday a small convoy of trucks came to
the complex to be loaded with explosives for the purpose of manufacturing
cannon shells. The objective was to take position near the base on
Wednesday August 23rd and wait until the next day when the trucks would be
loaded. At that point, several sharpshooters would fire one round each of
an explosive bullet at a designated truck while they were in the process of
loading, so that there would be a carry on explosion into the storage
facility.
The operation was quite successful and the explosion generated the sort of
publicity the Mossad was hoping for in attracting attention to Saddam's
constant efforts at building a gigantic and powerful military arsenal. The
Mossad shared its "findings" with the Western intelligence agencies and
leaked the story of the explosion to the press.
Since this was a guarded facility Western reporters had minimal access to
it. However, at the beginning of September, the Iraqis were inviting
Western media people to visit Iraq and see the rebuilding that had taken
place after the [Iran-Iraq] war, and the Mossad saw an opportunity to
conduct a damage assessment.
A man calling himself Michel Rubiyer saying he was working for the French
newspaper "le figaro", approached Farzad Bazoft, a thirty one year old
reporter freelancing for the British newspaper the Observer. Rubiyer was in
fact Michel M. a Mossad agent.
Michel told Farzad that he would pay him handsomely and print his story if
he would join a group of journalists heading for Baghdad. The reason he
gave for not going himself was that he had been black-listed in Iraq. He
pointed out the Bazoft could use the money and the break especially with
his criminal background. Michel told the stunned reporter that he knew of
his arrest in 1981 for armed robbery in Northhampton England. Along with
the implied threat he told Bazoft that he would be able to print his story
in the Observer as well.
Michel told Bazoft to collect information regarding the explosion ask
questions about it get sketches of the area and collect earth samples. He
told the worried reporter that Saddam would not dare harm a reporter even
if he was unhappy with him. The worst the Saddam would do was kick him out
of the country, which would in itself make him famous.
Why this particular reporter? He was of Iranian background and would make
punishing him much easier for the Iraqis and he wasn't a European whom they
would probably only hold and then kick out. In fact, Bazoft had been
identified in a Mossad search that was triggered by his prying into another
Mossad case in search of a story involving an ex-Mossad asset Dr Cyrus
Hashemi who was eliminated by mossad in 1986. Since Bazoft had already
stumbled on too much information for his own good - or the Mossad's for
that matter - he was the perfect candidate for this job of snooping in
forbidden areas.
Bazoft made his way to the location as he was asked and as might be
expected was arrested. Tragically, his British girlfriend, a nurse working
in a baghdad hospital was arrested as well.
Within a few days of his arrest, a Mossad liaison in the US called the
Iraqi representative in Holland and said that Jerusalem was willing to make
a deal for the release of their man who had been captured. the Iraqi
representative asked for time to contact Baghdad, and the liaison called
the next day, at which point he told the Iraqi representative it was all a
big mistake and severed contact. Now the Iraqis had no doubt that they had
a real spy on their hands, and they were going to see him hang. All the
Mossad had to do was sit back and watch as Saddam proved to the world what
a monster he really was.
On March 15th 1990 Farzad Bazoft, who had been held in the Abu Gharib
prison met briefly with the British Ambassador to Iraq.
A few minutes after the meeting he was hanged.
The world was shocked, but the Mossad was not done yet. To fan the flames
generated by the brutal hanging, a Mossad sayan in New York delivered a set
of documents to ABC television with a story from a reliable Middle Eastern
source telling if a plant Saddam had for the manufacturing of uranium. The
information was convincing and the photos and sketches were even more so.
It was time to draw attention to Saddam's weapons of mass destruction.
Only three months before, on December 5, 1989, the Iraqis had launched the
Al-Abid, a three-stage ballistic missile. The Iraqis claimed it was a
satellite launcher that Gerald Bull, a Canadian scientist, was helping them
develop. Israeli intelligence knew that the launch, although trumpeted as a
great success, was in fact a total failure, and that the program would
never reach its goals. But that secret was not shared with the media. On
the contrary, the missile launch was exaggerated and blown out of
proportion.
The message that Israeli intelligence sent out was this: Now all the pieces
of the puzzle are fitting together. This maniac is developing a nuclear
capability (remember the Israeli attack on the Iraqi reactor in 1981) and
pursuing chemical warfare (as seen in his attacks on his own people, the
Kurds). What's more, he despises the Western media, regarding them as
Israeli spies. Quite soon, he's going to have the ability to launch a
missile from anywhere in Iraq to anywhere he wants in the Middle East and
beyond.
After the arrest of Bazoft, Gerald Bull, who was working on the Iraqi big
gun project called Babylon, was visited by Israeli friends from his past.
The visitors (two Mossad officers) had come to deliver a warning. They were
both known to Bull as members of the Israeli intelligence community. The
Mossad psychological department had studied the position Bull was in and
analysed what was known about his character. It arrived at the conclusion
that, even if threatened, he wouldn't pull out of the program but would
instead carry on his work with very little regard for his personal safety.
Ultimately, Bull's continuing with the program would play right into the
Mossad's hands. Through the bullet riddled body of Gerald Bull the world
would be made to focus on his work: the Iraqi giant gun project. The timing
had to be right though; Bull's well publicised demise had to come right
after an act of terror by the Baghdad regime, an act that could not be
mistaken for an accident or a provocation. The hanging of the Observer
reporter on March 15 was such an act.
After the reporter's execution in Baghdad, a Kidon (Mossad assassination)
team arrived in Brussels and cased the apartment building where Bull lived.
It was imperative that the job be done in a place where it would not be
mistaken for a robbery or an accident. At the same time, an escape route
was prepared for the team and some old contacts in the Belgian police were
revived to make sure they were on duty at the time of Bull's elimination so
that, if there was a need to call on a friendly police force, they'd be on
call. They weren't old of the reason for the alert, but would learn later
and keep silent.
When Bull reached the building at 8.30pm, the man watching the entrance
signaled the man in the empty apartment on the sixth floor (Bull's floor)
to get ready: the target had entered the building. The shooter then left
the apartment and hid in an alcove.
Almost immediately after the elevator door closed behind Bull, the shooter
fired point blank at the man's back and head. The shooter then walked over
to Bull and pulled out of his tote bag a handful of documents and other
papers, which he paced in a paper shopping bag he had with him. He also
collected all the casings from the floor and dropped the gun into the
shopping bag.
In the following weeks, more and more discoveries were made regarding the
big gun and other elements of the Saddam war machine. The Mossad had all
but saturated the intelligence field with information regarding the evil
intentions of Saddam the Terrible, banking on the fact that before long,
he'd have enough rope to hang himself.
It was very clear what the Mossad's overall goal was. It wanted the West to
do its bidding, just as the Americans had in Libya with the bombing of
Qadhafi. After all, Israel didn't possess carriers and ample air power, and
although it was capable of bombing a refugee camp in Tunis, that was not
the same. The Mossad leaders knew that if they could make Saddam appear bad
enough and a threat to the Gulf oil supply, of which he'd been the
protector up to that point, then the United States and its allies would not
let him get away with anything, but would take measures that would all but
eliminate his army and his weapons potential, especially if they were led
to believe that this might just be their last chance before he went
nuclear. [...]
Hariri was a close friend of French President Chirac and was reportedly
planning a come back to Lebanese politics and, as noted above, was credited
with "restoring Lebanon's reputation abroad as a liberal, open Middle
Eastern country".
The fact is, the emergence of ANY open, democratic, liberal and SECULAR
Arab nation, particularly on Israel's border and under the influence of an
internationally respected figure like Hariri, would threaten the carefully
crafted image of Middle Eastern Arab states as "Islamic terrorist regimes"
and undo all of Mossad's hard work. It is for this reason that Hariri
became an enemy of the state of Israel and of its patron the US, and had to
be removed from the picture. By framing Syria for the murder of Hariri,
Israel could also apply pressure on the Syrian government and, as we have
seen with the beginning of the withdrawal of Syria troops from Lebanese
territory, provide the pro-Israeli Christians in the Lebanese government
with a much bigger say in Lebanese politics.
Coming back to the bombing itself; it is interesting to note that the
details of the attack bore a stark resemblance to many other Israeli
intelligence operations, most notably the killing in Beirut in 1979 of then
PLO Chief Ali Hassan Salameh aka "the Red Prince".
Gordon Thomas writes in his book "Gideon's Spies":
Three Mossad agents who could pass for Arabs crossed into Lebanon and
entered the city. One rented a car. The second wired a series of bombs into
its chasis, roof, and door panels. The third agent parked the car along the
route the "Red Prince" traveled to his office every morning. Using precise
timing Rafi Eitan had provided, the car was set to explode as PLO chief
Salameh passed. It did, blowing him to pieces.
Hariri's murder followed a very similar pattern. Approx 300kg of explosives
were packed into a car sitting outside a derelict hotel on a Beirut road.
As Hariri's cavalcade of armored Mercedes Benz cars passed, the bomb was
remotedly detoned, obliterating several cars - blowing one into the third
story of the hotel - killling 14 people injuring 135 others and leaving a
15 foot deep, 40 feet wide, crater in the road.
Of course, no one should be surprised to hear that the the mythical yet
ubiquitous al-Qaeda AND the Palestinians were immediately dragged into the
fray. Reuters "informs" us:
The Palestinian who appeared in a video claiming responsibility for the
killing of former Lebanese prime minister Rafik al-Hariri ... called Hariri
a Saudi agent and said the attack was also "in revenge for the pious
martyrs killed by security forces of the Saudi regime" and used a religious
term for Saudi Arabia often used by al Qaeda militants fighting Riyadh's
U.S.-allied government since 2003.
It is interesting to note that in most other False Flag operations, Mossad
and/or the CIA employed one of the many "previously unknown al-Qaeda-linked
groups" to claim responsibility for their attacks, yet in this instance the
blame had to land squarely at the doorstep of Syria, so hot on the heels of
the claim of reponsibility by an "al-Qaeda-linked group"...
'Qaeda' Says Jihadists Didn't Kill Hariri
DUBAI (Reuters) - A statement attributed to al Qaeda and posted on the
Internet on Tuesday denied Islamists had killed former Lebanese Prime
Minister Rafik al-Hariri, saying Lebanese, Syrian or Israeli intelligence
were behind the attack.
The statement, signed by a hitherto unknown group calling itself the Al
Qaeda Organization in the Levant, was posted on an Islamist Web site often
used by al Qaeda a day after another unknown Islamist group said it was
behind the huge Beirut blast that killed Hariri.
The authenticity of the statement could not be immediately verified.
"Blaming the Jihadist and Salafist groups for what happened in Beirut is a
complete fabrication," the statement said. "The priorities of the jihadist
groups in the Levant are supporting our brethren in Iraq and Palestine, not
blowing up cars."
Clearly, the technology involved in dispatching Hariri was far beyond the
capabilities of a group of Afghani cave-dwellers or the fully oppressed and
marginalised Palestinian militants. No indeed, this particular operation
required the resources of a modern, fully equipped and well organised
covert intelligence agency.
As the Economist stated:
Some detect the work of an intelligence service—if not Syria’s, some
other foreign power’s—in the method of the attack. Certainly, the size
and sophistication of the bomb suggest it was the work of a well-organised
and experienced group, or a government. The blast was big enough to leave a
huge crater and shatter windows hundreds of metres away. Moreover, it was
sophisticated enough to defeat jamming mechanisms, which the billionaire Mr
Hariri’s convoy always used while travelling, to forestall such remotely
triggered attacks. Mr Hariri, who made his fortune in construction in Saudi
Arabia, knew he had many enemies and took what countermeasures he could.
A quick note on the above. While "construction" is certainly part of the
equation, the fact that Hariri was a billionaire is unlikely to be the real
motivation for his murder, despite the ever so subtle spin from the
Economist.
As in the case of Iraq, Israel is determined to do whatever necessary to
ensure that it remains all-powerful in the region and prevent any of its
Arab neigbours from emerging as solid, unified Muslim democracies that it
could not demonise as "terrorist states". By murdering Hariri and having
the blame pinned on Syria, the Mossad have removed a stablising influence
on recovering Lebanese society and the Middle East in general, and given
the US government an excuse to further ratchet up the war rhetoric towards
Damascus.
In this sense, Israel shares a common goal with the US and it is for this
reason that Israel has always enjoyed the overwhelming support of
successive US administrations. While the US and Israel both make much of
their bogus "war on terrorism", both countries have long since realised
that it is by fomenting "terrorism" and "terrorist" groups that their
control of the Middle East can be assured. Yet, while both countries share
a common goal, the reasons that each desires to achieve that goal are
slightly different.
By controlling the extensive oil resources in the Middle East (and the
countries that sit upon them), the US can ensure that it continues to top
the heap of world superpowers. Israel too wishes to remain as a powerful
world player, and its leaders realise that acting as a hired thug for the
US in the region is the best way to do so. Yet it is more than mere power
lust that is driving Israel's leaders to deliberately antagonise and
provoke the entire Arab world. Israel's very presence in the Middle East is
predicated on the Judaic notion of a "chosen people" and their very own
homeland granted to them thousands of years ago by their mythical god,
yahweh.
While it may be possible (if unlikely) to make a convincing geopolitical
argument for the US government's Middle East policies over the years, to
understand the thinking of people like Sharon (and all those that act on
his orders) one would have to first embrace the idea that a group of human
beings can constitute a "chosen people", one of their lives being worth
more than 1,000 of the lives of the "lesser" people of the world. One would
also have to accept that the "chosen people" are divinely entitled to a
piece of land in the Middle East and are permitted therefore to act in any
way necessary to achieve their goals of "lebensraum".
While the Israeli government is careful to distance itself from extreme
Judaic beliefs, it is clear that it is just such beliefs that underpin its
policies.
To conclude. There are only two nations that had the means, motive and
opportunity to carry out the particular type of attack that took the life
of Hariri - a man who was one of the very few remaining hopes for a just
and lasting peace in Lebanon and the greater Middle East.
Sadly, it seems that peace is the very last thing on the minds of the
people who over 80 years ago drew the map of what has become the killing
fields of the modern day Middle East. Their decades (or should we say
millennia) long agenda is simply too far developed for them to permit
anything or anyone to stand in the way of its full and undoubtedly bloody
implementation. All of it coming soon to a phony theatre of "war on
terrorism" near you.
Update May 2006: In his book Mordakte Hariri. Unterdruckte Spuren im
Libanon (The Hariri File: Silenced Evidence in Lebanon) German journalist
Jurgen Cain Kulbel makes a strong case for the United States and Israeli
link to the Hariri assassination.
The major revelation in the book is that the static emitters of Mr Hariri's
convoy, normally capable of preventing the activation of bombs at a
distance, "totally failed". The journalist affirms, citing a Swiss expert,
that the system could only be neutralized by its maker, which happens to be
none other than an Israeli company founded by ex-Mossad agents.
See this link for an article on this author and his book.
Signs of the Times