Zionist Provocation Prompted Hamas Reaction

The intent of the Balfour Declaration was the British War Cabinet’s support for the creation of a Jewish settlement in Palestine insofar as it did not encroach upon the rights of the Palestinians. This came at a big price, even before we consider the price soon paid by the Palestinians.  The world war was extended by another year, with the consequent increase of death and devastation, in return for Zionist support to bring the USA into the war.[i] This necessitated the betrayal of the Arabs who were fighting against the Turks, as immortalized by the legendary T. E. Lawrence.[ii]

Israeli empire from Nile to Euphrates

A faction of Zionists and Messianic Jews were not going to be content with a little space of their own in Palestine. The ultimate ambition remains an Israeli empire stretching from the Nile to the Euphrates; an aim that cannot be repudiated because it is regarded as based on the Abrahamic Covenant in Genesis, where JHVH was claimed to have promised that territory to the Israelites.[iii]

The establishment of an Israeli empire of such dimensions and indeed the appearance of the Jewish Messiah is predicated on the ritual sacrifice of a red heifer, and thereafter rebuilding the Temple of Solomon. On the latter sits the Al-Aqsa Mosque, the third holiest site of Islam. Hence, the most extreme elements of Zionism and Judaism are unequivocal in stating that the Al Aqsa Mosque will be destroyed, and the Temple rebuilt. The site is a constant flashpoint in Palestine-Israeli conflict, and Zionists provoke such conflict at will. A particularly notorious example was when in September 2000 Ariel Sharon in a cynical political maneuver swaggered about Al-Aqsa, with a delegation from the Likud Party, protected by hundreds of Israeli police.[iv]

Al Aqsa invaded

In the present conflagration it seems evident that Zionists interests wanted to provoke a reaction from Hamas to justify the elimination of the Gaza enclave. The Israelis can claim victim status by stating that they are defensively responding to a brutal, unprovoked, Hamas attack on Israeli civilians. There are some problems with this widely publicized narrative. A hint as to the background is in the title of the Hamas name given to their attack on Israel– “The Al-Aqsa Deluge.”

On 4 October 2023 Zionist settler groups occupied Al-Aqsa and attempted to perform “Talmudic rituals.” Despite the illegality of the invasion, the hundreds of invaders were given support by the Israeli police, Israel controlling admission to the site; and Muslims were denied entrance to their own holy ground.[v] The Hamas reaction followed 5 days later. The global media claimed that this was a horrendous attack on civilians that took Israel by “surprise.” However credible reports claim that Israel was warned by Egyptian intelligence three days before the attack that Hamas was planning retaliation.[vi] Israel has denied that such a warning was received. Logic demands that Israeli leaders would have been aware that there would be a Palestinian response to the desecration of Al-Aqsa. With the specter of pograms, the “world community” could be easily manipulated into supporting the elimination of Palestinians from Gaza, and turning a blind eye to the horrendous destruction of Palestinians, who are proverbial sitting ducks.

Bogus atrocity story

            Atrocity stories are essential in such a process, and no more so than the claims of atrocities committed against babies. Hence, the allegation that Hamas fighters beheaded forty Israeli babies at the Kfar Aza kibbutz. The news media throughout the world could be relied on to give this credibility far and wide. However, Sky News repudiated the story.[vii] It follows a familiar pattern. German soldiers were accused of bayoneting Belgian babies during World War I. In 1990 a fifteen-year-old Kuwaiti girl testified before a U.S. Congressional committee that she had witnessed Iraqi soldiers take Kuwaiti babies from their incubators and leave them to die. This allegation was exposed several years later as a contrivance of the neocon Committee for a Free Kuwait, but had been used by President H. W. Bush et al to justify the war against Iraq. The Christian Science Monitor reflected years later how such atrocity propaganda is used to inflame war.[viii]

            The whole scenario of the Kfar Aza kibbutz being helpless before a murderous Hamas seems implausible. As a kibbutz of 700 3km from Gaza, one might ask why it was supposedly left undefended, especially when a few days before “Talmudists” had occupied Al-Aqsa, which was guaranteed to create a Palestinian reaction?

Prelude to Rebuilding of Temple

What was the motive for the provocation against Hamas? Is it in preparation for the rebuilding of the Temple of Solomon on the site of Al-Aqsa?

Next year a red heifer will be sacrificed. Such a sacrifice is a prerequisite for the rebuilding of the Temple of Solomon. After years of futile attempts there now seems to be a plentiful supply of perfectly red heifers in Israel, although only one is needed, for the 2024 Passover, one being bred in Israel, and several others sent by an American Evangelical framer.

The Jewish periodical Forward commented on this: “The movements toward building a Third Temple have generally resulted in violence; Jewish prayer on the Temple Mount is seen by Palestinians as an assertion of Israeli authority on the holy site. And when a red heifer was in Haifa in the ’90s, a columnist at Haaretz even wrote that it should be shot before it caused another intifada.”[ix] Several weeks later an “intifada” had been provoked, again, by the actions of Jewish Messianists at Al-Aqsa Mosque.

The Hamas offensive being named the “Al-Aqsa Deluge” has meaning indispensable in understanding the present configuration, but this have received little commentary from the Western media, commentators, and analysts.