The Wild Man Prophecy!
Most everyone knows that Abraham is the father of both the Jewish and Arab nations. However, most people do not realize that both Jews and Arabs are descendants of Shem. In fact, according to Biblical chronology, Shem and Abraham’s lives overlap by about 100 years. So Abraham could have known Shem. Some Bible scholars believe that Melchizedek to whom Abraham gave tithes after the battle of Chedorlaomer was in fact Shem.
[1] The point I am trying to make here is that both Jews and Arabs are “Shemites” or Semites, that is, descendants of Shem. The word anti-Semitism comes from Shem’s name. Since both Arabs and Jews are “Shemites” or Semites, the word anti-Semitism should mean those who are prejudice to both Arabs and Jews. Instead it is used exclusively to designate hatred or prejudice toward the Jewish people.
According to Wikipedia, the word anti-Semitism was first used
in the late 19th century in Germany as a more scientific-sounding term for Judenhass or Jew-hatred.[2] 
In any event, Abraham is the father of the Jewish people through Isaac, the son of Abraham’s wife Sarah. But Abraham is also the father of the Arab nations through Ishmael, his son through his wife’s handmaiden Hagar. Ishmael was actually older than Isaac. Because of the jealousy which was arising between Hagar and Sarah, and ultimately between their descendants, Sarah asks Abraham to put away both Hagar and her son Ishmael. Abraham laments, but God tells him to yield to his wife’s request.
Hagar and her son are put out of the camp and wander in the desert. In her desperation Hagar calls out to the Lord for help and He helps her. The angel responsible for her rescue prophesizes over Ishmael saying,
And he will be a wild man; his hand will be against every man, and every man’s hand against him; and he shall dwell in the presence of all his brethren.[3]
The Lord also says,
For I will make him a great nation.[4]
And later:
These are the sons of Ishmael, and these are their names, by their towns, and by their castles (or encampments); twelve princes according to their nations.[5]
Have the Arab nations been traditionally “a wild man?” Surely their manner of spreading their Islam faith during the time of Mohammed was by violence. Also, since they are a tribal people, each tribe tends to keep to themselves and have strong tribal preferences. Therefore, even though they are brothers, they find it hard to agree and have throughout history been in constant squabbles among themselves, which we even see today in the Sunni-Shiite division. We see it in the “liberated” nations of Iraq and Libya. Without a strong man dictator to force the different tribal areas to work together, the country soon falls into chaos, with every man’s hand against each other.
The Israelis, realizing that the Arabs are often against each other, have used the fact to their advantage in the Middle East conflict. Because of their knowledge of the Arab weakness, they have been able to prevent some attempted unions by Arab leaders which could have proved dangerous to Israel’s national security. Secret documents have shown that the Mossad, the Israeli equivalent to the CIA, have used the philosophy of divide-and-conquer as their foreign policy using their expert intelligence to foment division among the Arab nations. As long as the Arab nations are fighting among themselves, Israel’s security is safe and Israel becomes the most dominant military power in the area.
On June 25, 2014, blogger Brandon Martinez wrote the following on his website commenting on the fighting in Iraq between the different Muslim groups, confirming Israel’s policy:
On the June 22 edition of NBC’s Meet the Press, Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu let slip his government’s intention to divide and conquer the Middle East. Remarking on the latest ISIS (Islamic State of Iraq and Syria) incursions into Iraq, Netanyahu expressed the desire of his regime to promote internal strife in Israel’s neighboring states.
“We must weaken both [Sunni and Shia Muslims],”
Netanyahu said, implying that it is in Israel’s interests to have Muslims fighting and squabbling among themselves.
“When your enemies are fighting each other, don’t strengthen either one of them, weaken both,” said the Israeli leader.
Martinez continues,
That is what ISIS was created to do. The terrorist militia’s American, Israeli and Saudi backers are content to see these roving bands of malcontents and marauders behead their way to Damascus and Baghdad. What better way to solidify Israel’s position as the sole hegemony in the region? Fragmenting, weakening and Balkanizing the Middle East has been part-and-parcel of the Israeli impulse from the very beginnings of the Jewish state.[6] 
Martinez brings to our attention that oddly enough, back in 1982, Israeli military strategist Oded Yinon had written a paper called,
A Strategy for Israel in the 1980s.[7] At the time Iraq was Israel’s most powerful and potential adversary and Israel’s greatest threat. Yinon, therefore, advocated the territorial dissection of Iraq into three states. Each state would be based on ethnic and confessional roots, namely Kurds, Shiites and Sunnis. Yinon promoted the same scenario for the other Arab/Muslim states surrounding Israel, including Syria, Egypt, Lebanon and Iran.
Some experts claim the idea of a Middle East divided along Arab tribal lines goes back as far as the 1920s. According to Martinez, Yinon believed that fractured and divided Arab/Muslim countries could not pose any challenge to Israeli dominance. He insisted,
Every kind of inter-Arab confrontation will assist us in the short run and will shorten the way to the more important aim of breaking up Iraq into denominations as in Syria and in Lebanon.[8] Martinez concludes,
Yinon’s geopolitical blueprint is still very relevant today. His vision of a crippled and prostrate Arab/Muslim world is playing out before our very eyes.[9]
To go to previous chapter click
HERETo go to the next chapter click
HERETo go to the index of the book click
HERE
0 Comments:
Post a Comment