Enter Hannah Ahrendt once again:
"If a Jewish commonwealth is obtained in the near future--with or without partition--it will be due to the political influence of American Jews.... But if the Jewish commonwealth is proclaimed against the will of the Arabs and without the support of the Mediterranean peoples, not only financial help but political support will be necessary for a long time to come. And that may turn out to be very troublesome indeed for Jews in this country [the U.S.], who after all have no power to direct the political destinies of the Near East. It may eventually be far more of a responsibility than today they imagine or tomorrow can make good." (Arendt: Born in conflict, Israel will degenerate into Sparta, and American Jews will need to back away)
With that, Ahrendt fingered the hidden geopolitical agenda, an agenda emanating from pre-World War One London, and transferred, though not substantially altered, to post-Word War Two Washington, after the Second World War. This geopolitical agenda may be summarized by a statement given to British Prime Minister Campbell Bannerman by the 1907 Colonial Conference Commission:
"[to fight] against the Union of popular masses in the Arab region or the establishment of any intellectual, spiritual or historical link between them… [and thus recommended] all practical ways of dividing them as such as possible should be taught, and one way of doing so would be to construct a powerful, human ‘barrier’ foreign to the region – a bridge linking Asia and Africa – thus creating in this part of the world, and near the Suez Canal, a force friendly towards imperialism and hostile towards the inhabitants of the region." Cited in Anwarul Haque Haqqi, West Asia Since Camp David (Mittal P_ublications, 1988), pp. 105, cited at: The Origins of Imperial Israel- Part I Friday, 30. December 2011 Israel: A Buffer against Arab Nationalism: This, incidentally, is an excellent and informative article)
The British commission recommended:
That state was, of course, Israel.
"1) To promote disintegration, division and separation in the region.
"2) To establish artificial political entities that would be under the authority of the imperialist countries.
"3) To fight any kind of unity – whether intellectual, religious or historical – and taking practical measures to divide the region’s inhabitants."4) To achieve this, it was proposed that a “buffer state” be established in Palestine, populated by a strong, foreign presence which would be hostile to its neighbors and friendly to European countries and their interests. (Ibid., citing Robert I. Rotberg, Israel and Palestinian Narratives of Conflict: History's Double Helix (Indiana University Press, 2006), p. 220, emphasis added).
Initially, of course, the scheme met opposition from the other great corporate interest of the West, the Rockefeller interest, whose ties were principally with the Arabs of the Arabian peninsula. But in a pattern that would be repeated by the Nazis of the Third Reich, it was soon realized that to maintain efficient control of the region, both a buffer state and links to the Muslim world had to be sponsored. Divida et impera. And to do that, one had, of course, to manipulate the theological tenets of both religions, and to manipulate their apocalyptic expectations.
"In short, our global elites, in factoring the calculus of the influence of the Three Great Yahwisms on world culture and events must reckon with their individual prophetic expectations, and to the extent possible, manipulate and control them." (Scott D. deHart and Joseph P. Farrell, Yahweh the Two-Faced God: Theology, Terrorism and Topology, p. 96) That, of course, is the story we tell in part in our ebook, and particularly so in the third and fourth chapters.
What remains, though, is that Hannah Ahrendt was a courageous and outspoken critic of Zionism and its consequences for the modern world. And in this year 2012 of the apocalypse theater, we salute her, for her words are indeed prophetic, truer now, than when she first penned them.