- News Analysis
- Special Reports
- Arts & Culture
Zionist Strategy Formulated in 1996
While the USA, Israel and their hangers-on feign ignorance as to why there would be any rational explanation for a False Flag operation in regard to 9/11, the US strategy that was subsequently pursued after the Twin Towers topplings follows a scenario that was formulated in 1996, five years previously. The strategy document entitled A Clean Break was prepared by the Study Group for a New Israeli Strategy Toward 2000, a group set up by the think tank, the Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies headquartered in Jerusalem. Its authors described as “prominent opinion makers,” were listed as follows:
Richard Perle, American Enterprise Institute, study group leader; James Colbert, Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs; Charles Fairbanks Jr., Johns Hopkins University, Douglas Feith, Feith and Zell Associates; Robert Loewenberg, President, Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies; Jonathan Torop, The Washington Institute for Near East Policy; David Wurmser, Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies; Meyrav Wurmser, Johns Hopkins University.
Of these, in the Bush Administration Perle became director of the Defense Policy Board; Feith, Under-Secretary of Defense for Policy at the Pentagon; and David Wurmser, personal assistant to Chief Policy Adviser John Bolton, another Zionist.
The strategy document, A Clean Break focused primarily on removing Syria and Iraq as obstacles to Israeli hegemony in the Middle East, with the focus specifically being as a first step to remove Saddam, “an important Israeli strategic objective in its own right.” Of particular interest is the recommendation that “Cold War” type rhetoric be utilized for propaganda purposes in order to garner US support for an expanded Israeli role in the region in destabilising and “rolling back” regimes that are obstacles to Israel:
To anticipate U.S. reactions and plan ways to manage and constrain those reactions, Prime Minister Netanyahu can formulate the policies and stress themes he favors in language familiar to the Americans by tapping into themes of American administrations during the Cold War which apply well to Israel.
Hence, the oft-used references in the document to how Israel has a shared vision with the USA based on “Western values” and how it is a bulwark for those values surrounded by hostile regimes. This strategy has been pursued of course with vigor since Zionist David Frum, White House speechwriter for Bush, coined the term “axis of evil.”
This document also reiterated the need for Israel to resume the aggressive policy of “pre-emption” rather than just “retaliation,” for the purpose not only of overcoming Israel’s enemies but of “transcending” them.
In 2002 the Project for a New American Century presented a policy document in the form of a letter to George W Bush amongst whose signatories was again Richard Perle. This coterie reiterated the common bond between Israel and the USA in the wake of 9/11 as fellow “free and democratic” nations, adding: “We are both targets of what you have correctly called an ‘Axis of Evil,’” a term which was itself a Zionist contrivance, as referred to above.
Israel is targeted in part because it is our friend, and in part because it is an island of liberal, democratic principles — American principles — in a sea of tyranny, intolerance, and hatred. As Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld has pointed out, Iran, Iraq, and Syria are all engaged in “inspiring and financing a culture of political murder and suicide bombing” against Israel, just as they have aided campaigns of terrorism against the United States over the past two decades. You have declared war on international terrorism, Mr. President. Israel is fighting the same war.
Here we have for the most part Zionists defining what are “American principles,” declaring those principles to also be Israel’s and identifying the common enemies that must be destroyed in a “war on international terrorism,” those enemies being Iran, Iraq and Syria, in addition to a subsequent reference to Afghanistan.
The nightmare scenario of attacks on the USA by Iraq – and Iran – is then emphasized, by the familiar but entirely discredited theme of “weapons of mass destruction.”
Furthermore, Mr. President, we urge you to accelerate plans for removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq. As you have said, every day that Saddam Hussein remains in power brings closer the day when terrorists will have not just airplanes with which to attack us, but chemical, biological, or nuclear weapons, as well. It is now common knowledge that Saddam, along with Iran, is a funder and supporter of terrorism against Israel….
…Israel’s fight against terrorism is our fight. Israel’s victory is an important part of our victory. For reasons both moral and strategic, we need to stand with Israel in its fight against terrorism.
The rhetoric is that of Cold War type propaganda recommended in 1996 in the Clean Break document. In fact the founding statement of the Project for a New American Century unequivocally states that it has been formed amidst what it attempts to project as a new “Cold War” type world crisis scenario, precisely as the Study Group for a New Israeli Strategy Toward 2000 had recommended the year previously as a propaganda ploy to get the American public behind an aggressive US-Zionist alliance.
As the 20th century draws to a close, the United States stands as the world’s preeminent power. Having led the West to victory in the Cold War, America faces an opportunity and a challenge: Does the United States have the vision to build upon the achievements of past decades? Does the United States have the resolve to shape a new century favorable to American principles and interests?
That same year – 2000 – also, the Project for a New American Century, issued an agenda for post-Cold War foreign policy doctrine. The PNAC report emphasizes the need to maintain US weapons supremacy. The PNAC, as the name of the organization implies, is unapologetically dedicated to maintaining the USA as the center for world control; an American world empire whose hegemony is unchallenged; to not only “preserve but to ‘enhance’ what is called “American peace,” “Pax Americana,” as it is called. The neo-Cold Warriors of the PNAC emphasize in their document that a major concern is that with the demise of big power rivalries after the collapse of the Soviet bloc, the USA will become complacent, and there will be an ongoing process of military stagnation, rather than seeking not only to preserve but to “enhance” (sic) US hegemony. Again, like the concerns of the architects of the McCollum Memorandum and Operation Northwoods, the problem is to overcome this complacency, since “that solely pursued capabilities for projecting force from the United States, for example, and sacrificed forward basing and presence, would be at odds with larger American policy goals and would trouble American allies.” Here again we come to the crisis scenario that is needed to shock the USA and its allies out of complacency and justify the USA’s global military supremacy: “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.”
The current “war on terrorism” has been long in the making. The propaganda has been contrived to generate a new Cold War type hysteria, “Islamofascism” being among the new propaganda terms for the purpose. One of the primary goals of eliminating Saddam Hussein has been achieved. There remains Iran, with the war drums being beaten in that direction for the past several years, utilizing the same discredited allegations about “weapons of mass destruction” that were used to justify the invasion of Iraq; while Syria has been listed as the next victim. For UN delegations led by the USA to walk out on Iran’s President in feigned moral indignation that anyone could suggest that 9/11 could have been an inside jack-up, promptly followed by President Obama chastising Dr Ahmadinejad for such blasphemy is of course merely disingenuous humbuggery, given that such False Flag operations have been planned often enough previously both by the USA and Israel.
 Norman G Finkelstein, The Holocaust Industry: Reflections on the Exploitation of Jewish Suffering (New York: Verso, 2001).
 Ibid., 5.
 “Ahmadinejad’s speech leads to walkout at UN,” The Dominion Post, Wellington, New Zealand, September 25, 2010, A21.
 Urban Moving Systems, found by the FBI to be a Mossad front, the owner quickly departed back to Israel after initial questioning by the FBI. Marc Perelman, “Spy rumors on gusts of truth,” Forward, New York, March 15, 2002.
 Marc Perelman, ibid.
 C Peter Chen, “Mukden Incident and Manchukuo,” World War II Database, http://ww2db.com/battle_spec.php?battle_id=18
 Andrzej Jarczewski (Steward to the Gliwice Radio Station), Radio Station Gliwice Museum, http://www.radiostacjagliwicka.republika.pl/foldery/FoldeRAng.htm
 Robert Edwards, White Death: Russia’s War on Finland 1939–40, (London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 2006), 105.
 “Israel honors nine Egyptian [sic] spies, ”Reuters, March 30, 2005, http://www.ynetnews.com/Ext/Comp/ArticleLayout/CdaArticlePrintPreview/1,2506,L-3065838,00.html#n
 “September 11 – Another Operation Northwoods?,” (from chapter 4 of Bamford) http://www.blythe.org/nytransfer-subs/2001cov/11_Sept_2001_-_Another_Operation_Northwoods_
James Bamford, Body of Secrets: Anatomy of the Ultra-Secret National Security Agency From the Cold War Through the Dawn of a New Century (New York: Doubleday, 2001). The Operation Northwoods memorandum can be found at The National Security Archive, George Washington University, http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20010430/northwoods.pdf
 Anthony J Hilder, The War Lords of Washington: an Interview with Col. Curtis Dall (California: Institute for Historical Review, n.d.).
 Ibid., 11. Dall relates that Kimmel told him that US Secretary of State Marshall got around to telegraphing Kimmel via regular commercial channels about the “impending” attack two hours after the event. Dall, ibid., 15-16.
 Arthur H McCollum, “Memorandum for the Director, Subject: Estimate of the Situation in the Pacific and Recommendations for Action by the United States,” October 7, 1940, Point 9. http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/McCollum_memorandum
 McCollum, ibid., Point 10.
 “A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm,” Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies, 1996, http://www.iasps.org/strat1.htm
 William Kristol et al, letter to President Bush, April 3, 2002, Project for A New American Century, http://www.newamericancentury.org/Bushletter-040302.htm
 Project for a New American Century, “Statement of Principles,” June 3, 1997, http://www.newamericancentury.org/statementofprinciples.htm
 Thomas Donnelly, Rebuilding America’s Defenses: Strategy, Force and Resources for a New Century, Project for a New American Century, September 2000, http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf
 Ibid., iv.
 Ibid., 1.
 Ibid, 50-51.
 Ibid., 51.