[This Israeli government spokesman is appealing to the world to accept the proposition that any stray bullets or shells coming across the border from Syria are an “attack” upon Turkey, and by extension, an attack upon NATO. This statement is intended to back-up the recent Turkish Parliament authorization for military operations inside Syria. So Turkey is now ready to do what Israel has been afraid to do, go to war against Syria. It would almost seem as though Israel and Turkey had planned all of this from the beginning, were it not for that ugly little incident with the Gaza Flotilla and the IDF attack upon the MV Mavi Marmara aid ship, on May 31 2010. Less than one year later, in March or April 2011. the civil war was beginning inside Syria.
Is it more likely that two bitter antagonists could completely reverse their animosity in less than a year, to suddenly emerge united with one purpose, or is it more reasonable to assume that Israel and Turkey were secretly working hand-in-glove all along?
The anti-Syria project is part of the Greater Middle East strategy of the United States. Therefore, we are at this critical juncture in the anti-Syrian project (Israel supporting Turkey’s call for NATO intervention, while Obama appears to be cautioning against it) because that has been the plan all along, to give the President the appearance of having “clean hands.” Either that, or this has been an Israeli operation from the beginning, to force Turkey and the US/NATO into eliminating Syria for Israel. For that matter, you would then have to credit the Israelis for the entire Greater Middle East project, even though the whole thing fell apart when US/NATO forces failed to pile-on on the side of Israel against Hezbollah in 2006. If Israelis had been in charge of the terror war at that time, Syria would have been bombed back to the Stone Age long ago. Therefore, the only reasonable assumption to make is that Israel has been handling the CIA’s dirty work in laying the groundwork for this latest anti-Syrian operation, in order to maintain plausible deniability for Washington.
Turkey and Israel appeared to be set at odds, in order to elevate Turkey’s image in the Muslim world. Saudi Arabia and Qatar were allowed to conduct their own foreign policies (which appeared to be going against the desires of Obama) for the same reason, to elevate their status on the Muslim street. Together, the three “maverick” Arab governments have appeared to take the lead in the American/NATO/Arab alliance, creating a so-called “Islamic NATO,” which was used to overthrow the Libyan government and to murder Muammar Qaddafi. This Islamist NATO has led the preliminary battles which have been scheduled as the opening rounds of the bigger war to come, as justification at the United Nations Security Council to empower the real NATO forces inside Syria, so they can do the same to Bashar al-Assad.
Turkey has been America’s primary puppet in this grand deception all along, meaning that the Turkish government has sanctioned the attack which killed eight Turkish citizens on the MV Mavi Marmara in the Gaza Flotilla and probably the PKK attack upon the Turkish Navy Barracks at Iskenderun earlier that same morning, as well. In that rocket attack, seven Turks were killed. State acquiescence to false flag attacks upon their own citizens seems to be a requirement of all participants in America’s terror war, a pattern set by the example of the US Govt. itself on 9-11-2001 (SEE: US/NATO Seeking Escape Mechanism for New Formula for Imperial Aggression). The “war on terror,” a.k.a., “plan for Greater Middle East,” is a Pentagon operation, from the beginning, intended to unleash the power of NATO through a series of wars of aggression, without upsetting the American image in the world. In this way, the US military can utilize its power to the fullest, even violating the nuclear threshold, without turning the world against us. Now, all that is left is for NATO forces to be successfully brought to bear in Syria, squaring the circle, without making us the “bad guys” against a global “Arab Spring.” NATO is still perfecting the mechanism which will enable them to reliably use “false-flag operations” to create “fault-free” wars of aggression, attacking yourself, to obtain the right to defend yourself, from yourself.]
PARIS (Reuters) – Israel’s Deputy Prime Minister Dan Meridor said on Thursday a deadly Syrian mortar strike on a Turkish town had to be considered an attack on a member of the NATO alliance.
Israel is technically at war with Damascus and occupies the Golan Heights that it seized in the 1967 war and later annexed, but it has generally taken a cautious line on the uprising in its Arab neighbor.
“One has to say that according to the NATO treaty, it was an attack on a member of NATO, and that means France,” Meridor told reporters during a visit to Paris, referring to France’s membership of NATO.
Syria and Israel have not exchanged fire in three decades, and a parliamentary briefing in July by the Israeli armed forces chief about the risk of “uncontrollable deterioration” in Syria were interpreted by local media as a caution against opening a new fighting front with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.
Meridor said he did not want to go into details about the incident but said the deaths in Syria had to end.
“Syria is in a horrible situation, a civil war. Each day men, women and children are being killed and it must be stopped,” Meridor said after meeting France’s foreign and defense ministers.
“We are in a process that isn’t finished. We don’t see the end for now.”
Turkey’s government on Thursday said “aggressive action” against its territory by Syria’s military had become a serious threat to its national security and parliament approved the deployment of Turkish troops beyond its borders if needed.
Immediately after the incident, Ankara, which has the second-largest army in NATO, called a meeting of the organization’s North Atlantic Council.
Syria has apologized through the United Nations for the mortar strike in Turkey and said such an incident would not be repeated.
Israel has been particularly worried that Hezbollah, the Iranian-inspired Shiite militia in neighboring Lebanon, may gain access to the chemical weapons should Assad’s grip slip amid a 18-month-old insurgency.
Assad, from the minority Alawite sect, considered an offshoot of Shia Islam, has close ties both with Shi’ite Iran and Hezbollah, which was originally set up to oppose Israel.
“The alliance with Iran is extremely worrying (for us). Iran on one side, Hezbollah on the other, with Syria in the middle. For us, it’s very important that this unholy alliance is broken,” Meridor said.
“If the Assad regime were to fall, it would be a vital strike on Iran,” he said.
(Reporting By John Irish)