Zionist interest in the waters of Lebanon goes back as least as far as the Paris Peace Conference of 1919 when Chaim Wietzman wrote to the British Prime Minister explaining that because of its water requirements, a Jewish homeland in Palestine must include the Litani River.

PRISON PLANET.com Copyright © 2002-2006 Alex Jones All rights reserved.

Is Israel Allowing Hezbollah to Kill Its Citizens?

Kurt Nimmo | August 7 2006

For the honest historian, it comes as no surprise government either kills its own citizens or allows enemies to do the same in an effort to score propaganda points or as an excuse to commence hostilities.

Examples are numerous, from FDR denying Americans passport and travel documents to let them flee the Japanese onslaught of the Philippines in the lead up to the Second World War (see US prisoners claim Roosevelt left them in Philippines deliberately) to Operation Northwoods, a plan drawn up by the Joint Chiefs of Staff to stage fake terror attacks in America (including assassination, airplane hijacking, and sinking of boats) in order to devise a pretext to invade Cuba.

Indeed, some of us, routinely dismissed as tinfoil hatters, believe elements within the United States government engineered and executed the terrorist events of September 11, 2001, as a way to get the ball rolling on the “war against terrorism,” that is to say the war against Islam, currently heating up big time in the Middle East.

Considering the above, and other examples, including the sinking of the Lusitania, a passenger ship loaded up with a secret cargo of munitions (a fact admitted by the decidedly less than conspiratorial Encyclopedia Britannica), which contributed indirectly to the entry of the United States into World War I, and the suspicious sinking of the Maine in the Havana harbor, used as a pretext for the United States to declare war on Spain in 1898, the allegation “Israel has deliberately allowed Hezbollah to retain some of it’s fire power, essentially for PR purposes, because having Israeli civilians killed helps them in the public relations war” should not be a startling or especially mind-boggling revelation.

According to Tom Ricks, a reporter for the Washington Post, during an appearance on CNN’s Reliable Sources, citing “military analysts,” Israel “purposely has left pockets of Hezbollah rockets in Lebanon, because as long as they’re being rocketed, they can continue to have a sort of moral equivalency in their operations in Lebanon.”

Or, put differently, if Hezbollah continues to rocket northern Israel, the IOF may claim “moral equivalency” and continue its push into Lebanon, once again to the Litani River, a plentiful source of fresh water that long ago figured into Israel’s calculations of its endangered water resources (see Angela Joy Moss, ICE Case Studies, Litani River and Israel-Lebanon), in fact a resource long coveted by the Zionists, going as far back as Chaim Weizmann in 1919 and, a few decades later, Ben-Gurion and Moshe Dayan, who advocated Israeli occupation of Lebanon up to the Litani River (see Stephen C. Lonergan and David B. Brooks, Watershed: the Role of Fresh Water in the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict).

Ronald Bleier wrote for the Middle East Labor Bulletin, Spring 1994:

Zionist interest in the waters of Lebanon goes back as least as far as the Paris Peace Conference of 1919 when Chaim Wietzman wrote to the British Prime Minister explaining that because of its water requirements, a Jewish homeland in Palestine must include the Litani River.

I agree the Litani River is an essential elemtn to this also. The Jordan River is drying up and Israel is running out of fresh water supplies.

So all Syria need do is poisin the supply and Israel wil be up the creek so to speak.

While the oil angle canvassed in the Cole article may be a strategic reason for Israel's huge over reaction to the kidnapping (or was it a citizens' arrest for trespassing) of the two IDF soldiers, I suspect there was an even more vital reason.

The clue is where Israel wants the northern limit of the proposed buffer zone to be, the Litani River. It makes no sense given the proven long range some Hezbollah rockets to want a buffer zone only about 20k from the Israeli/Lebanese border (sections of the river are only 4km from the border). As a safety zone its ridiculous.

But it would give Israel access to something even more precious in Israel than oil – water.

Israel is guzzling it at a huge rate and its options are limited. It already steals most of the water in areas under its control. Indeed, one of the main reasons the Palestians rejected Oslo/Camp David II was because it gave Israel control of the aquifer under the West Bank in perpertuity with the Palestians being given only a small, fixed quota.

The neat 'trick' in this deal could be that Israel won't have to pay a cent for protection over theft of the Litani's liquid gold. Its going to get other nations to keep any Lebanese protestors quiet.

THOMAS RICKS, REPORTER, "THE WASHINGTON POST": I think it will be. But I think civilian casualties are also part of the battlefield play for both sides here. One of the things that is going on, according to some U.S. military analysts, is that Israel purposely has left pockets of Hezbollah rockets in Lebanon, because as long as they're being rocketed, they can continue to have a sort of moral equivalency in their operations in Lebanon.

KURTZ: Hold on, you're suggesting that Israel has deliberately allowed Hezbollah to retain some of it's fire power, essentially for PR purposes, because having Israeli civilians killed helps them in the public relations war here?

RICKS: Yes, that's what military analysts have told me.

KURTZ: That's an extraordinary testament to the notion that having people on your own side killed actually works to your benefit in that nobody wants to see your own citizens killed but it works to your benefit in terms of the battle of perceptions here.

RICKS: Exactly. It helps you with the moral high ground problem, because you know your operations in Lebanon are going to be killing civilians as well.
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0608/06/rs…

I recommend this very interesting article from Juan Cole, where he offers a very interesting scenario as to why Israel is really being so over the top with it's aattacks on Lebanon:
http://www.juancole.com/2006/08/one-ring-to-rule-…

Do you not see the short cuts your mind always takes- it is as if you do not want to take the time to understand all of the information, and keep resorting to empty insult and propaganda. The Iranian President is dangerous because, whatever his intentions in the region are, he appeals to his people on a point which is incontrovertible: the west takes an arrogant stance toward the arab nations, treat them as less than human and assume that they can redraw the region without even conducting diplomatic talks with Iran and Syria. The theocrats in washington won't talk to the Islamic nations. This is madness.