Chapter 16 — Yom Kippur and the oil embargo: “They always get what they want”
Kissinger rejects Egyptian olive branch
Between 1967 and 1970, after Israel had occupied the Sinai, Golan Heights and the West Bank and East Jerusalem, there followed the “War of Attrition”.
This was a series of “hit and run”, but usually large scale military operations by Egyptian and Israeli forces, mainly concentrated in the Sinai area. Thousands died. Among them Russian military advisers and pilots who had come to Egyptian leader, Gamal Abdel Nasser’s aid.
Two examples of Israeli “military operations” in Egypt were the Abu Za’abal bombing on February 13, 1970 when they dropped bombs and napalm on an industrial plant, killing 80 civilian workers. And the Bahr El-Baqar primary school bombing just a few weeks later on 8 April which killed 46 children. (Wiki)
In September 1970, Nasser died of a heart attack and was replaced by Anwar Sadat.
Sadat approached Nixon and Kissinger through a variety of emissaries to offer peace for territory. Kissinger ignored him, believing the Israelis could defend the Sinai Peninsula from behind their “impregnable” Bar Lev Line on the east bank of the Suez Canal. Again and again, Sadat threatened war if the Americans failed to budge the Israelis. Kissinger believed Sadat was bluffing and rebuffed him. When Sadat expelled all of the Soviet Union’s 15,000 military advisers from Egypt in 1972, Kissinger refused to acknowledge the Egyptian’s strategic shift.
Despite warnings from King Hussein of Jordan and various intelligence agencies, the Syrian and Egyptian armies took Israel unawares when they attacked on October 6, 1973. The Egyptians reduced the Bar Lev sandbanks with water cannon, threw down pontoon bridges, and crossed into the Sinai. Syrian tanks and infantry poured into the occupied Golan Heights. Only American emergency supplies, the call-up of reservists, and a lighting run to the west side of the canal saved Israel’s gains of 1967.
(SYRIAN ARCHIVES ADD NEW DETAILS TO HENRY KISSINGER’S DISASTROUS MIDDLE EAST RECORD, Charles Glass, The Intercept, June 18, 2017)
And this is very important to remember..the “Yom Kippur war” narrative paints the image of Israel/Palestine being under attack. It wasn’t. It was Egypt and Syria attempting to regain the illegally occupied territory that Israelis stole during the previous “war” based on lies. The “six day war” of 1967.
… the war that broke out on 6 October 1973 with coordinated attacks by Egypt and Syria against Israeli troops stationed on occupied territory. No fighting actually took place on Israeli territory, but the shock of the attacks [edit: and zionist bias in the media] often made it seem in the US media that Israel itself was under siege.
(FALLEN PILLARS: U.S. Policy towards Palestine and Israel since 1945 and WARRIORS AGAINST ISRAEL: How Israel Won the Battle to Become America’s Ally 1973, both by Donald Neff)
The “Jewish vote” threat…again
Similar to the threats made against Johnson over the “Jewish vote” after the USS Liberty incident (which was actually unnecessary — he was a puppet), the same threat was waved in front of Kissinger and Nixon.
Demands instantly arose for a massive supply effort by the United States to Israel. President Nixon at the time already was deeply involved in the spreading Watergate scandal and much of the pressure from the Israeli lobby focused on Kissinger.
By 12 October, Israeli Ambassador Simcha Dinitz bluntly warned Kissinger that “if a massive American airlift to Israel does not start immediately then I’ll know that the United States is reneging on its promises and its policy, and we will have to draw very serious conclusions from all this.” Kissinger’s biographers, Bernard and Marvin Kalb, observed of this remark: “Dinitz did not have to translate his message. Kissinger quickly understood that the Israelis would soon ‘go public’ and that an upsurge of pro-Israeli sentiment could have a disastrous impact upon an already weakened administration.”
(FALLEN PILLARS: U.S. Policy towards Palestine and Israel since 1945 and WARRIORS AGAINST ISRAEL: How Israel Won the Battle to Become America’s Ally 1973, both by Donald Neff)
Before I go any further, I have to point out that this “Jewish vote” threat against Kissinger smells staged. It was an excuse which Kissinger hid behind to push Nixon’s administration in the direction he and zionism wanted it to go. Here’s just one clue as to why I say this:
Richard Perle, an aide to Senator Henry Jackson, was overheard discussing classified information with someone at the Israeli embassy in 1970. Information that had been supplied to him by someone on the National Security Council staff.
[Note: Henry Kissinger was National Security Adviser at this time]
The NSC member involved was Helmut Sonnenfeld who was “known from previous wiretaps to have close ties to the Israelis as well as to Perle. Sonnenfeldt, a former State Department intelligence official, had been repeatedly investigated by the FBI for other suspected leaks early in his career.”
(Kissinger and Nixon in the White House, Seymour Hersh, The Atlantic, May 1982); Bio: http://www.historycommons.org/entity.jsp?entity=helmut_sonnenfeldt )
Alarm bells, surely? No. Sonnenfeld was promoted while Perle continued to pull strings.
Within days of the 1968 Nixon election, Henry Kissinger had picked Sonnenfeld to serve as a senior staff member on the National Security Council staff (1969–1974).
Despite the investigation (which went nowhere), in 1974, Sonnenfeld was appointed Counselor of the U.S. Department of State, where he served from 1974, continuing after Nixon’s resignation for the duration of the Ford administration.
During his time in the National Security Council and in the State Department, he was a close assistant and adviser of Kissinger and became known as “Kissinger’s Kissinger”. (Wiki)
Kissinger was a zionist stooge by his actions no matter what he uttered in public from time to time. Full stop. And he would use zionist intrigue to further his war criminal antics across the globe in years to come.
Anyway…
The US response to the Egypt/Israel situation went way beyond an arrogant US administration ignoring “Arab nationalists” in Egypt and Syria.
Kissinger and the Israelophiles in the US were prepared to bankrupt the country and isolate themselves from all Arab countries for these lunatics.
The oil embargo
Excerpts from the brilliant piece written by Donald Neff: “Nixon Administration Ignores Saudi Warnings, Bringing On Oil Boycott” posted in WRMEA, October/November 1997, pp 70–72
That same day, US oilmen sent a joint memorandum to President Nixon expressing their alarm at the dangerous possibility of steep oil production cuts and price rises if the US continued its protective policies toward Israel. Nonetheless, Nixon and Kissinger ignored the warning and openly launched a huge air operation to supply Israel on 13 October.
When on 18 October Nixon attempted to appease Israel’s clamoring supporters even further by requesting from Congress $2.2 billion in emergency aid for Israel, Saudi Arabia and other oil producing states finally imposed a total oil boycott agasint the United States in retaliation for its unlimited support of Israel.
Kissinger estimated that the direct costs to the United States were $3 billion and the indirect costs, mainly from higher prices of oil, $10 billion to $15 billion. He added: “It increased our unemployment and conributed to the deepest recession we have had in the post war period.”
This was a high price to pay for a country that was supposed to enhance US interests.
(FALLEN PILLARS: U.S. Policy towards Palestine and Israel since 1945 and WARRIORS AGAINST ISRAEL: How Israel Won the Battle to Become America’s Ally 1973, both by Donald Neff)
On Oct. 20, 1973, Saudi Arabia announced it was imposing a total oil boycott against the United States in retaliation for its support of Israel during the October war. The action caused an economic earthquake around the world.
(Lacey, The Kingdom, p. 413; State Department Middle East Task Force, “Situation report #51,” 10/21/73, secret; declassified 12/31/81. Also see Neff, Warriors Against Israel, p. 260.)
Suddenly Americans and others were forming long lines at gas stations, and the greatest transfer of wealth in world history began. The price of gasoline soared, briefly up tenfold. It was a devastating added cost for governments, corporations and families.
(Rubenberg, Israel and the American National Interest, p. 173.)
What Kissinger failed to say was that he bore major responsibility for the boycott.
The boycott could not have come as a surprise, as so many U.S. officials of the period have pretended. Since the beginning of 1973, Saudi Arabia’s King Faisal ibn Abdul Aziz had been warning the Nixon administration with increasing urgency that he would employ the oil weapon unless Washington forced Israel to return Arab land it had been occupying since 1967. As guardian of Islam’s holy sites, Faisal was particularly perturbed that Israel continued to occupy the Haram Al-Sharif with the Al Aqsa…mosque in Arab East Jerusalem. Haram Al-Sharif is the third holiest site, after Mecca and Medina, to the world’s one billion Muslims.
In April the king sent one of his top aides, Oil Minister Ahmad Zaki Yamani, to Washington to warn officials of his seriousness about imposing an oil boycott.
(Lacey, The Kingdom, p. 398; also see Neff, Warriors Against Israel, pp. 110–11.)
The Saudi suspected that Kissinger’s Jewishness prevented him from being impartial on Middle East matters and believed Kissinger was trying to keep the facts from the American people. Yamani continued to voice the king’s message, including granting an interview to The Washington Post. He pointed out to the newspaper that the West was pressing Saudi Arabia to increase its oil production up to 20 million barrels a day from its current 7.2 million. Yamani said: “We’ll go out of our way to help you. We expect you to reciprocate.”
(Lacey, The Kingdom, p. 399.)
The Post was no more impressed by the Saudi message than Kissinger. On April 20, the Post editorially criticized the Saudis for threatening an oil boycott and added that “it is to yield to hysteria to take such threats as Saudi Arabia’s seriously.”
(Washington Post, 4/20/73.)
Faisal was so disturbed by the U.S. rejection of his message that he granted for the first time in his life an interview to American TV. He warned: “America’s complete support of Zionism against the Arabs makes it extremely difficult for us to continue to supply U.S. petroleum needs and even to maintain friendly relations with America.”
(Lacey, The Kingdom, p. 400.)
Israel was particularly active in encouraging Washington to ignore Faisal. Foreign Minister Abba Eban asserted that there was not “the slightest possibility” of an oil boycott. He added: “The Arab states have no alternative but to sell their oil because they have no other resources at all.”
(Lacey, The Kingdom, p. 400)
In May, Faisal summoned to his Riyadh palace Frank Jungers, the board chairman of the Arabian American Oil Company. He warned the oilman about the possibility of an oil boycott. Jungers knew the king and believed that “he never acts on a whim. He never breaks his word. When he speaks, he never tells you anything unless he means it.” Jungers passed on Faisal’s message to both the White House and the State Department. It was ignored.
(Sheehan, The Arabs, Israelis, and Kissinger, p. 69.)
That same month Faisal also called in four other leading oilmen and warned them that Arab resentment of U.S. support of Israel was rising, adding: “You may lose everything. Time is running out.”
They tried to relay that message. No one in the White House, the State Department or the Pentagon took it seriously. When they sought to meet with Kissinger, he refused to see them.
(Lacey, The Kingdom, pp. 400–02.)
Otto N. Miller, the board chairman of Standard Oil of California, tried to make the matter public by discussing it in a company letter to the firm’s nearly 300,000 shareholders and employees.
He wrote that Americans should foster “the aspirations of the Arab people [and] their efforts toward peace in the Middle East. There is now a feeling in the Arab world that the United States has turned its back on the Arab people.”
Despite these repeated warnings, the Nixon administration continued to echo the Israeli claim that Saudi Arabia was not serious. George Shultz, who later as secretary of state proved completely incompetent in dealing with the Middle East, dismissed Faisal’s warnings as Arab “swaggering.”
(Sheehan, The Arabs, Israelis, and Kissinger, p. 68)
Nixon himself repeated the Israeli mantra that “oil without a market…does not do a country much good.” No one in the Nixon administration, certainly not Kissinger or Shultz, seemed to be willing to consider that America and most of the rest of the industrialized world were so dependent on oil that even its partial denial would be devastating.
(Facts on File 1973, p. 741.)
That blind attitude prevailed in Washington and Tel Aviv up to, and beyond, the successful attack by Egypt and Syria on Oct. 6 against territories occupied by Israel. It was a traumatic event. The Arabs caught Israel totally unprepared. Egyptian troops successfully crossed the Suez Canal, an amphibious operation thought impossible by Israel and U.S. military experts, and the Syrians captured back most of the Golan Heights in the first hours of the assault.
(Neff, Warriors Against Israel, p. 153; Kissinger, Years of Upheaval, p. 458.)
Despite the initial Arab successes, Israel remained optimistic. So, too, did Washington. Even two hours after war had actually broken out, the combined intelligence agencies of the United States still did not believe hostilities were likely or that the Arabs were capable of such coordinated action.
(“Pike Report on the Hearings of the House Select Committee on Intelligence,” written in 1976 and published in the Village Voice, 2/16/76. Also see Kissinger, Years of Upheaval, p. 458.)
The first assumption of Henry Kissinger, who barely two weeks earlier had become secretary of state, was that Israel would quickly prevail. As he complacently said to Alexander Haig, President Nixon’s chief of staff, America should let Israel “beat them up for a day or two and that will quiet them down.”
(Pike Report on the Hearings of the House Select Committee on Intelligence,” written in 1976 and published in the Village Voice, 2/16/76. Also see Kissinger, Years of Upheaval, p. 472)
During the second day of fighting Prime Minister Golda Meir sent a sedate message to the White House asking for a delay on a cease-fire vote in the U.N. Security Council for at least three or four days, time enough, it was thought, to repel the Arabs. The request was quickly granted. That same day Israel requested a modest amount of emergency supplies, which was also approved.
(Pike Report on the Hearings of the House Select Committee on Intelligence,” written in 1976 and published in the Village Voice, 2/16/76. Also see Kissinger, Years of Upheaval, p. 477)
Behind the “Pike Report” lay another reality:
During the month of the Yom Kippur war, Mordecai Gur, the defense attaché at the Israeli embassy who later became commander-in-chief of Israeli forces, demanded of Admiral Thomas Moorer, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, aircraft that were equipped with a high technology air-to-surface anti-tank missile called the Maverick. At the time, the U.S. had only one squadron so equipped. When Moorer explained that he’d been trying to convince Congress to approve the technology, Gur told him it would be no problem. And he got this only squadron equipped with Mavericks sent to Israel. Against Moorer’s wishes.
“I’ve never seen a president — I don’t care who he is — stand up to them [the Israelis]. It just boggles your mind. They always get what they want. The Israelis know what is going on all the time. I got to the point where I wasn’t writing anything down. If the American people understood what a grip those people have got on our government, they would rise up in arms. Our citizens don’t have any idea what goes on.”
(Iran-Contra and the Israeli Lobby, excerpted from the book Covert Action the Roots of Terrorism, edited by Ellen Ray and William H. Schaap, 2003)
The “nuclear demonstration”
By Oct. 9, it finally became clear to Israel that it was in desperate straits. So great was its fear that it reportedly armed its nuclear weapons.
(Hersh, The Samson Option, pp. 223–30. Also see Cockburns, Dangerous Liaison, p. 173; Green, Living by the Sword, pp. 90–92. Time reported the story as early as 1976. None of the principals involved has ever admitted the nuclear arming incident, although former Ambassador to Egypt Herman Eilts says Kissinger years later casually referred to it; see Hersh, The Samson Option, p. 230.)
This was confirmed by a witness at the heart of Golda Meir’s entourage:
“This particular 12-minute interview segment concerns one such episode. It involves the story of the small ministerial consultation that took place in Prime Minister Golda Meir’s office on the early afternoon of the second day of the 1973 Yom Kippur War. 7 October was arguably the most difficult day of the war, when Defense Minister Moshe Dayan proposed to the prime minister and her close advisors that Israel begin preparing its nuclear weapons for a demonstration blast.”
[Note: the author goes on a rant through zio-tinted glasses about “Israeli restraint” but MY bottom line in presenting this video is that the interview shows that they had nuclear weapons and had them armed]
(Source and interview:
https://www.wilsoncenter.org/arnan-sini-azaryahu
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=t-G-YpBJEDA )
This “demonstration blast” involved dropping a nuke on Cairo.
This came just 4 years after Kissinger introduced the US policy of “ambiguity” towards Israeli nukes. The same year that the head of the NPT drive to curb and control nuclear weapons globally, Glenn T Seaborg, was enabling zionists their procurement! (See Chapter 9).
Richard Nixon became president in January, 1969. Kissinger became National Security Advisor that year and U.S. Secretary of State in 1973
National Security Advisor Henry Kissinger…believed that, at the minimum, it would be sufficient for U.S. interests if Israel kept their nuclear activities secret. As he put on his draft memo to President Nixon on or around July 19, “public knowledge is almost as dangerous as possession itself.” Indeed, Nixon opposed pressure and was willing to tolerate Israeli nuclear weapons as long as they stayed secret.”
“…top officials at the Pentagon were especially supportive of applying pressure on Israel [about their nuclear weapons]. On 14 July 1969, Deputy Secretary of Defense (and Hewlett-Packard co-founder) David Packard signed a truly arresting memorandum to Secretary of Defense Melvin Laird, arguing that failure to exert such pressure “would involve us in a conspiracy with Israel which would leave matters dangerous to our security in their hands.”
(Link to documentation: https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu/nukevault/ebb485/)
It was also Kissinger who was in a position to draw a line in the sand over the Israeli nuclear weapon program when they requested F4 Phantoms and could very easily have tied conditions to their “sale”. He didn’t. His own memorandum has him on record as outlining the reasons why nukes in zionist hands was very dangerous!
The Israelis, who are one of the few peoples whose survival is genuinely threatened, are probably more likely than almost any other country to actually use their nuclear weapons.
— Because of these dangers, both we and the Russians might find it harder to stay aloof from conflicts in the Middle East.
Israeli acquisition of nuclear weapons would: Impose a substantial cost on US relations with Arabs and Soviets. Setback NPT efforts. Substantially increase the probability that someone will use nuclear weapons in anger. Increase the risk of Soviet- US confrontation. Make a political settlement all but impossible.
(Memorandum from Henry Kissinger to President Nixon, “Israeli Nuclear Program,” n.d., with enclosures dated 19 July 1969, Top Secret, excised copy)
….by assuring the Israelis that the United States would always provide them with a military edge over the Arabs, Johnson guaranteed the escalation of an arms race . . . Third, by refusing to follow the advice of his aides that America make its delivery of nuclear-capable F-4 Phantoms conditional on Israel’s signing the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, Johnson gave the Israelis the impression that America had no fundamental objection to Israel’s nuclear program.
(Passionate Attachment, former Undersecretary of State George Ball)
Don’t forget that while Kissinger acknowledged the danger of nuclear weapons in zionist hands, that there was a war going on between Egypt and Israel. And that they had stolen land from two neighboring countries, killed military personnel of a “superpower”, and of course were operating from a base of operations stolen from Palestinians.
While the entire Arab world felt insulted and belittled by US actions, zionist sociopaths were planning what to do with their nuclear weapons (that they supposedly didn’t have), and the White House was prepared to lose tens of billions on top of the billions they were giving to Israel.
For what??
Kissinger stayed on the same destructive path.
Word of Israel’s perilous position reached Israeli Ambassador Simcha Dinitz in Washington early in the morning. He met with Kissinger in the White House within hours and received assurances that Israel’s needs would be promptly met.
(Kissinger, Years of Upheaval, pp. 492–96.)
To be sure that Israel could quickly communicate with him, Kissinger ordered installed in Ambassador Dinitz’s office at the Israeli Embassy a private, secure telephone line that directly linked the secretary of state with the ambassador, a unique privilege for a foreign country.
(21 Kalb and Kalb, Kissinger, p. 467.)
Washington’s blatant favoring of Israel caused acute fears among oilmen that Saudi Arabia might carry out its threatened boycott. On Oct. 12, the chairmen of Aramco’s four parent companies — J.K. Jamieson of Essco, Rawleigh Warner of Mobil, M.F. Granville of Texaco and Otto N. Miller of Socal — sent a joint memorandum to President Nixon expressing their alarm at the possibility of an oil boycott and price rise if the United States continued its coddling of Israel.
Their memo said, in part: “We are convinced of the seriousness of the intentions of the Saudis and Kuwaitis and that any actions of the U.S. Government at this time in terms of increased military aid to Israel will have a critical and adverse effect on our relations with the moderate Arab oil-producing countries.”
The White House acknowledged receiving the memo but took no action on it.
(Kelly, Arabia, the Gulf & the West, p. 396.)
Instead, the next day, Oct. 13, the Nixon administration began a massive airlift of weapons and ammunition to Israel.
(Kissinger, Years of Upheaval, p. 514.)
However, America’s European allies, more cautious about provoking a boycott, refused to allow U.S. planes en route to Israel to overfly their airspace. The planes had to use America’s leased base at the Portuguese island of Lajes, neither the best nor the cheapest route.
(Rubenberg, Israel and the American National Interest, p. 166.)
By this time, Israeli forces, their morale bolstered by open U.S. support, were slowly gaining the upper hand. They had pushed the Syrians back beyond the 1967 cease-fire line on the Golan Heights and, on Oct. 16, they finally broke through the Egyptian line and a small contingent crossed the Suez Canal into Egypt proper. The Israeli military force was now not only successfully holding onto the Arab land it had captured in 1967 but it was threatening the ancient capitals of Cairo and Damascus.
On the day of the Israeli crossing of the Suez Canal, the Arab oil countries met in Kuwait and raised the price of crude 70 percent, from $3.01 to $5.11 a barrel.
(Kelly, Arabia, the Gulf & the West, 397; Lacey, The Kingdom, 406.)
Despite that dramatic gesture, Kissinger continued to insist that an oil boycott was not likely. He met on Oct. 17 with a delegation of Arab foreign ministers from Algeria, Kuwait, Morocco and Saudi Arabia. Afterwards he somehow concluded that there would not be an Arab oil boycott despite America’s open resupplying of Israel.
(Kissinger, Years of Upheaval, p. 536.)
The next day King Faisal sent a stern warning to Washington. He said bluntly that an embargo would be placed on all oil shipments to the United States unless Israel returned to the 1967 lines and the U.S. stopped its arms supply to Israel.
(Kelly, Arabia, the Gulf & the West, 397.)
Despite the Saudi warning, Kissinger decided that a way must be found for Washington “to gain a little more time for Israel’s offensive….”
(Kissinger, Years of Upheaval, pp. 538, 541.)
This implicitly meant that the U.S. supply operation would continue in defiance of Faisal’s warning.
Instead of returning to the former lines as the Arabs were demanding, a massive Israeli force crossed the canal on Oct. 18, directly threatening Cairo. The invasion not only stunned the Arabs but the Soviets too. Soviet Chairman Leonid Brezhnev sent an urgent message to Nixon proposing a cease-fire in place and Israeli withdrawal to the 1967 lines. Kissinger stalled to give the Israelis more time to press their counterattack.
(Kissinger, Years of Upheaval, pp. 539–540; Neff, Warriors Against Israel, pp. 249–50, 253.)
Libya retaliated on the same day by announcing a total cutoff of oil shipments to the United States and a rise in the price of its premium oil to other countries from $4.90 to $8.25 a barrel.
(Neff, Warriors Against Israel, p. 257.)
The final straw for Faisal came the next day. On Oct. 19, President Nixon requested from Congress $2.2 billion in emergency aid to Israel, a huge sum far beyond any previous aid to Israel.
(Lacey, The Kingdom, p. 413; Nixon, The Memoirs of Richard Nixon, p. 932. Up to 1973, the largest amount of combined economic and military aid to Israel in one year had been $634.3 million in 1971. Israel’s regular aid for 1973 had been budgeted at $492.8 million.)
In effect, the United States was now saying to the Arabs that it would finance Israel’s fight to retain its illegal occupation of their land. At no time during the war did combat take place inside Israel itself. All the fighting was on Egyptian and Syrian soil.
An explanation for Nixon’s reckless action can be found in the fact that in October Nixon was thinking less of foreign relations than of himself. By this time he was deep in the quagmire of the Watergate scandal and the devastating disgrace of his vice president. Spiro Agnew had resigned Oct. 10 after being accused of corruption. Nixon was desperate for political support, leaving Kissinger basically in charge of U.S. foreign policy throughout the October war.
(Neff, Warriors Against Israel, pp. 218, 261–62.)
The next day Saudi Arabia carried out its longstanding threat. From April to as late as Oct. 18, Faisal had been insistently warning Washington to temper its bias toward Israel. Now he acted. Riyadh announced at 9 p.m. local time on Oct. 20 that it was imposing a total oil boycott against the United States, its closest Western friend. The Saudi action had a domino effect. Abu Dhabi, Algeria, Bahrain, Kuwait and Qatar quickly followed suit, violently disrupting international commerce.
(Lacey, The Kingdom, p. 413; State Department Middle East Task Force, “Situation report #51,” 10/21/73, secret; declassified 12/31/81.)
As a result of the boycott, the Arabs became enormously wealthy, largely at the expense of the United States and the West. Yet the boycott and the war had little effect on Israel’s colonial policies. Even today it retains Syrian and Jordanian land — if not Egypt’s, which America essentially bought back from Israel with the Sinai agreements.
(Donald Neff, Middle East History: It Happened in January, “Unprecedented U.S. Aid to Israel Began under the Sinai Agreements,” Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, January 1997.)
Washington not only continued its close support of the Jewish state but grew closer to it, despite the heavy costs and the fact that Israel’s occupation violated international law and America’s own policies.
The boycott was lifted on March 18, 1974, leaving economies around the world shattered and many individuals living poorer lives, Kissinger admitted: “I made a mistake.”
(Sheehan, The Arabs, Israelis, and Kissinger, p. 69.)
[Note: yeah right…]
Skeptics might wonder whether it was a mistake, or wanton disregard of U.S. interests during a passionate effort to help Israel.
(Nixon Administration Ignores Saudi Warnings, Bringing On Oil Boycott, Donald Neff, Washington Report on Middle East Affairs,
October/November 1997, Pages 70–72)
To top the situation off, during the confrontation in the Sinai, Egyptian troops were trapped and under siege, the Soviets threatened to take unilateral action to rescue them. Tempers flared both in Washington and Moscow; U.S. military forces went to a Stage 3 alert (Stage 5 is the launch of nuclear attacks). The Soviets backed down on their threat but the damage to relations between the two nations was serious and long lasting.
Eventually, Israeli troops withdrew from some of their positions in both the Sinai and Syrian territory, while Egypt promised to forego the use of force in its dealings with Israel. Syria grudgingly accepted the peace plan, but remained adamantly opposed to the existence of the Israeli state.
(The Yom Kippur War brings United States and USSR to brink of conflict, History, October 2006)
The ceasefire was signed on October 24 1973. The oil embargo lasted until March 18, 1974.
Nixon resigned from office on August 9, 1974, after the Watergate affair.
The price of support for Israel. And their new puppet
Kissinger’s stubborn and reckless support to protect zionist expansionism cost the US (and global) economy years of damage.
Before 1973, gas prices in the United States were stable for decades. Through The Great Depression, World War II, and the postwar boom, oil traded in a low and narrow range. Many neighborhoods, companies, and sectors of the economy grew dependent on these prices. When a sudden shock occurred (the oil embargo), it threw the United States into a state of chaos. Gas shortages proliferated, inflation and unemployment spiked, and the stock market crashed by nearly 50%…. The consequences were myriad. First of all, the economy was unprepared for higher prices and struggled with them through the rest of the 1970s. Inflation was a consistent economic ill throughout the Administrations of Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford, and Jimmy Carter. Several times it topped out above 10% annually. There was also a harsh recession from 1973–75 that was made worse by the oil shock.
(The 1973 Oil Crisis and Its Effects, American History USA)
On September 8, 1974, Nixon’s successor, and the next zionist puppet in line, Gerald Ford, pardoned him. (Wiki)
When Nixon resigned on August 9, 1974, Ford automatically assumed the presidency.
Lyndon Johnson had chosen Ford to sit on the Warren Commission to “investigate” the assassination of JFK. And he defended its conclusions until he died. That in itself shows the caliber of the man.
(LBJ Appoints Gerald Ford to the Warren Commission, The Miller Center, Nov 29, 1963)
Ford, forced in to a corner over continued zionist gamesmanship in the negotiations with Egypt and the economic crisis had to threaten Israel with economic sanctions. What happened next was a perfect example of the cheats that zionism has built in to the US political system. Multiple layers of control.
On March 24, Ford informed congressional leaders of both parties of the reassessment of the administration policies in the Middle East. For six months between March and September 1975, the United States refused to conclude any new arms agreements with Israel.
This upset the American Jewish community (yawn) and Israel’s prostitutes in Congress. On May 21, Ford”experienced a real shock” when seventy-six U.S. senators wrote him a letter urging him to be “responsive” to Israel’s request for $2.59 billion (equivalent to $12.46 billion in 2020) in military and economic aid.
Remember, this was when the US economy was in the toilet because of Israel.
The following summer months were described by Ford as an American-Israeli “war of nerves” or “test of wills”. The Sinai Interim Agreement (Sinai II) was formally signed on September 1, and aid resumed.
(Goldstein, The Rabin memoirs, p. 261; American Presidents and the Middle East, George Lenczowski, p.150; Gerald Ford, A Time to Heal, 1979, p.298)
That Ford pretended that there was a “back and forth” in negotiations, for what was essentially the internationally recognized illegal occupation of three other countries’ land, one of the built in cheats of zionist control in the US came in to effect. The spineless Israelophiles in the Senate. Money was thrown at Israel while US citizens suffered the consequences and gave them billions out of their own taxes!
When you see who was in Ford’s shadow throughout his career, you’ll understand that it was no coincidence that he was in position to replace Nixon, with Kissinger and Israeli spy Sonnenfeld at the helm. Max Fisher.
Max Fisher
Max Fisher was an advisor on “Middle East and Jewish issues”, to every administration from President Eisenhower to President Bush.
(“Max Fisher, 96, Philanthropist and Adviser to Presidents, Dies”, New York Times, March 4–2005.)
A force in Republican politics since the 1950s, when he backed the first gubernatorial campaign of George Romney (father of Mitt Romney) Fisher was an intimate of each Republican president since Eisenhower and was particularly close to President Nixon, who made Fisher his liaison to the Jewish community.
In addition to undertaking sensitive diplomatic missions at several crisis points in Israeli-American relations, Fisher raised hundreds of millions of dollars for a variety of Jewish causes.
He served at various times as leader of the United Jewish Appeal, the Jewish Agency for Israel, and the Council of Jewish Federations.
In addition to his involvement with Romney, Fisher grew close to Nixon, beginning in the late 1950s when Nixon was vice-president.
(Edit: and when Nixon was in the pockets of the zionist mafia)
Already chairman of UJA, Fisher’s fund-raising attained legendary status when he raised $100 million in a single month to support Israel in the wake of the Six-Day War, in 1967.
Nixon brought Fisher into his 1968 presidential campaign as liaison to Jewish organizations. According to a former Nixon staffer, Leonard Garment, Fisher convinced Nixon not to support a Republican filibuster against the appointment of Abe Fortas to the Supreme Court.
(Edit: Abe Fortas being the zionist asset at the heart of the Johnson administration. See Chapter 15)
During the Nixon administration, Fisher acted as a private diplomatic messenger to Israel….During the Yom Kippur War of 1973, Fisher lobbied the president and Henry Kissinger nonstop to resupply Israel promptly, according to Mr. Garment.
Fisher had been friends with Gerald Ford since Mr. Ford’s first run for Congress, in 1948, and played an important role in preventing an American tilt away from Israel when Mr. Ford became president. During the new president’s “state-of-the-world” speech, Fisher sat with the Ford family in the gallery of the House of Representatives.
As a confirmed Republican, Fisher was largely shut out of the White House during the Carter administration. According to Mr. Golden’s “Quiet Diplomat,” when the Camp David Accords were signed in 1979, Fisher was invited to the reception but was given a seat on the periphery.
(Max M. Fisher, 96, Strong Republican Voice For Israel
By STEPHEN MILLER, Staff Reporter of the New York Sun | March 4, 2005)
In 1957, in partnership with Tibor Rosenbaum’s (Mossad and Jewish mafia money source) Swiss-Israel Trade Bank. (Max) Fisher bought a controlling interest in Israel’s Paz conglomerate — long owned by the Rothschild family of Europe — which maintained a monopoly over Israeli oil and petrochemical interests.
(J. J. Goldberg. Jewish Power: Inside the American Jewish Establishment. (Reading, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Inc., 1996), pp. 169–170.)
From the early sixties, Gerald Ford had been largely backed, politically and financially, by Israeli asset Max Fisher. Just after Ford assumed the presidency in 1974 — in the wake of the Watergate scandal — Fisher was described as one of “the mystery men behind Gerald Ford” who would “tell the president what to do and when to do it.”
(The National Police Gazette, December 1974 — needs confirmed)
[Edit: I have yet to find the source for myself, but Ford’s attempt to sell the “conclusions” of the Warren Commission, his alliance with one of the main sponsors of Israel for decades, and his shuffling in to position beside Kissinger speak volumes.]
Here’s how Gerald Ford described Fisher in his own memoirs:
(Fisher was) “a prominent Detroit businessman who was chairman of the Jewish Agency for Israel. Max was a lifelong Republican and a close friend. He had served as an unofficial ambassador between the United states and Israel for years, and his contacts at the highest levels of both governments had often helped us bridge over misunderstandings.”
(Gerald R. Ford. A Time to Heal: The Autobiography of Gerald R. Ford.)
Fisher would go on to co-found the “Mega Group” with his protege Leslie Wexner.
An Israeli espionage and propaganda unit of rich “Jewish philanthropists” out of which grew the Epstein child abuse blackmail network (to be discussed).
Over a ten year period (1963–1973), zionism was calling the shots in US foreign policy. Remember that from 1956 to 1963 they had encountered resistance to their steamrolling plans for expansionism and attaining a nuclear arsenal. All of it went away when Kennedy was assassinated. And one of their own sat in the White House. LB Johnson.
What Eisenhower had thwarted when they were forced back from the Sinai and the Suez Canal, was turned on it’s head in 1967 with their land grab deception. The infiltration in to the White House was exposed with the USS Liberty attack and coverup. Israel was rewarded with an increase in military and financial aid and the wheels were set in motion for permanent aid that would make any future US president’s election dependent on the continuation of this set up.
Israel’s quest for nuclear arms was also tattooed in to US policy through Kissinger’s “ambiguity” policy, even though he was on record at the time saying that they were most likely to use them, and that it would cause major problems in relations with the Arab world and Russia.
They went ahead with it anyway.
By 1973, their biggest Arab ally, Saudi Arabia, had been threatening an oil boycott because of their support for Israel no matter what they did, who they slaughtered, or what weapons of mass destruction they accumulated. When Egypt and Syria moved to reclaim their own territory in 1973, the US, that is, Kissinger, ignored Saudi Arabia’s warnings when the US resupplied Israel militarily and gave them billions of dollars.
Remember that fighting took place only on stolen Egyptian and Syrian land.
Within days, zionists in the US again pulled the “Jewish vote” card, while zionist leaders in Tel Aviv were readying their nuclear weapons. One of them suggesting a “demonstration blast” on Cairo.
While Nixon bent to the “Jewish vote”, Saudi Arabia and other Arab states implemented the oil embargo which almost crippled the US economy, and would continue as a weight around it’s neck for over a decade.
Even Russia got involved at one point and a stand-off ensued.
The US still went against their own interests. But, when you see this constant bending, whose interests were at stake?
The era of Nixon and Ford set in motion the period when zionists realized that they had to fine tune the screw they had been turning on the Republican Party. Eisenhower had been a wake up call that the infiltration and eventual control of the Democrat Party, which had culminated in the zionist coup under Johnson, wasn’t enough. They helped create a new inroad through the old, tired but soon to be revived “anticommunism” campaign, and the neoconservatism movement.
