Messiás volt-e Menáchem Mendel Schneerson?

A héber kabbala szerinti "Isten 72 szellemének" kozmikus forrásai
AbonnentenAbonnenten: 0
LesezeichenLesezeichen: 0
Zugriffe: 3261

Messiás volt-e Menáchem Mendel Schneerson?

Beitragvon Admin » 26. Mai 2013 17:54

Klaus Matefi
Messiás volt-e Menáchem Mendel Schneerson?

(Első rész)



A Chábád Lubavics messianisztikus mozgalom vezető rabbija, Menáchem Mendel Schneerson, azaz a lubavicsi rebbe pont 21 évvel ezelőtt (1991.04.11-én; 5771 Niszán* 27-én) hívta fel a hallgatóságának a figyelmét arra, hogy az ószövetségi messianisztikus elképzelések rövid időn belül meg fognak valósulni:

http://www.zsido.com/konyv/307/3611/Zsi ... a_fenyeben
A Messiás a modernkori zsidó filozófia fényében
Chászid filozófia
a lubavicsi rebbe, Menáchem Mendel
Schneerson rabbi írásai alapján
Fény az alagút végén
A végső megváltás nem a távoli jövő álma, hanem közeli valóság.
(A Rebbe)

Amikor 1951-ben a Rebbe átvette a lubavicsi mozgalom vezetését, kijelentette, hogy az emberi történelem végtelen folyama végre meghozta gyümölcsét.
Ez a nemzedék lesz a száműzetés utolsó nemzedéke és a megváltás első nemzedéke mondta a személyes és az egyetemes megváltásé, amely a társadalom tökéletesedéséhez és egy olyan világ megvalósulásához vezet, melyet megtölt az Örökkévaló ismerete. Most már minden rajtunk múlik.


A végső megváltás hasonló módon fog bekövetkezni, mint az egyiptomi szolgaságból való megváltás és a kivonulás. Miképpen elküldte az Örökkévaló Mózest, hogy élére álljon az Egyiptomból való szabadulásnak, ugyanúgy fogja a Messiás az egész világot a végső megváltásba vezetni.
Miért van szükség vezetőre? Azért, mert a bennünk meglévő isteni szikra ellenére, az anyagi világ sötétsége elsöprő erejű. Éppen ezért az Örökkévaló önzetlen vezetőt küld, aki képes felülemelkedni a materiális világon, aki fogékony e nemzedék igényeire és képes átadni az Örökkévaló üzenetét a mi bonyolult, zűrzavarral teli társadalmunknak.

Minden rajtunk múlik
Mivel oly rég óta haladunk az élet sötét és kanyargós alagútjában, lassan elérjük a végét és megpillanthatjuk a beáramló meleg, ragyogó fényt. Most nincs idő elbizonytalanodásra, szkepticizmusra vagy önzésre.
Még a legkisebb dolog is egy kedves szó, pár forint jótékony célra, néhány imával eltöltött perc végtelenül fontos. Mindent meg kell tennünk, hogy akár egyetlen fénysugarat a sötétbe irányítsunk. Utunk végéhez közeledik: azon kell lennünk, hogy elérjük célunkat és találkozzunk az Örökkévalóval. Minden rajtunk múlik.

1991. április 11.-én, tizenegy hónappal betegsége előtt, a Rebbe szenvedélyes beszédet mondott. Szokatlanul szókimondó beszéd volt ez, és a Rebbe aggódó szavai arra késztették és buzdították híveit, hogy még inkább felkészítsék magukat és a világot a megváltásra.
Hogyan lehet, hogy a Messiás még nem jött el? kérdezte a Rebbe. Miért van a világ még minding telve gonoszsággal és szenvedéssel? Miért fogadjuk el, hogy a megváltás nem jő el sem ma, sem holnap, sem holnapután? Mindent el kell követnetek, hogy elhozzátok igaz megváltónkat! Nem elég, ha jól hangzó jelszavakat szajkózunk. Mindegyikőtöknek tetteitekkel kell elhozni a végső megváltást. Rajtatok áll, hogy létrehozzátok-e a Messiás harmóniával teli, tökéletes világát.

*
http://www.or-zse.hu/honapok/niszan-slomovics2005.htm
NISZÁN HÓNAP
Bölcseink azt mondják, hogy a "nagy és végső megváltás" - mint az egyiptomi megváltás - szintén Niszán hónapban lesz.
Ámen, így legyen!
2005.04.20
Eliezer Slomovits

Ez a messianisztikus mozgalom Magyarországon a rendszerváltás óta működik a rebbe megbízása alapján:

http://www.zsido.com/konyv/291/3361/A_C ... OT_BONTOTT
A CHÁBÁD MOZGALOM ZÁSZLÓT BONTOTT
A nemrégiben elhunyt Benedek Pál újságíró emlékére közöljük az izraeli Új Kelet napilapban publikált cikkét, mely a Chábád Lubavics Egyesület megalakulásáról, valamint Oberlander Báruch rabbi és felesége Magyarországra érkezéséről szól.

A Chábád mozgalom térképén Magyarország a boldog békében is "fehér folt" volt. Az anyaországi zsidó társadalom nem volt igazán nyitott a chaszidizmus befogadására. Eltekintve Nagykállótól, Olaszliszkától – és az első világháború után – Nagyváradtól, ahol a vizsnyici rebbe telepedett le és a hatása nyugati irányban is elterjedt. Továbbá Máramaros-sziget elmítendő, ahol nem csak a Teitelbaumok éltek. Maga a belzi rebbe Magyarországon át menekült (a jólértesültek szerint állítólag Kállay Miklós miniszterelnök egymillió pengőt kapott, mert fedezte az útját).

Magyarországra nem jutott el a guri, az Alexander és más rebbék szava, de ezekről a chászid áramlatokról legaláb hallottak az orthodoxián belül.

A Chábádról – egy szót sem.
Mert a Chábád – a lubavicsiek chászid mozgalma – a messzi Oroszország zsidóságának szellemi képződménye volt, a magyar ugar orthodoxiája meg inkább a lengyelországi áramlatokkal tartotta a tisztes távolságot.

Most új korszak hajnalán vagyunk. A Chábád mozgalom világszerte terjeszkedik, a forrósító hatása egyre több országban érzékelhető, s néhány hete Budapeten is zászlót bontott.

A New Yorkban székelő rebbe első személyes megbízottja az összes hivatalos engedélyek birtokában megérkezett a magyar fővárosba.


Megjelent ugyanis egy jogszabály, amely lehetővé teszi, hogy valamennyi egyház, illetve vallási csoportosulás szabadon hírdetheti az eszméit a papjai által. A szerzetesrendek és a különféle diakonia – szervezetek is virágzanak – szinte hihetetlen, hogy negyven évig tartó elhallgattatás után hetek alatt erőre kaptak és fájuk lombosodik – a chászid mozgalomnak sem áll semmi sem az útjában.

Figyelemmel volt erre a lubavicsi rebbe, s elküldte Pestre az egyik kedves tanítványát, a 23 esztendős Oberlander Báruch rabbit, aki már a tengeren túl született, de budapesti származású a család – pontosabban a mamája makói, a Gombó családhoz tartozik – de a nagyapja még zsidó tanító – mölámed – volt Budapesten.

Mi a Chábád célja a Duna partján?
Felkerestem tehát Báruchot, aki fiatal, öt hónapja chupá alá vezetett feleségével, Bát Sevával látott a pesti Chábád-központ szervezéséhez. Az asszonykának magyar irodalmi vonatkozása is van, ugyanis a nagyapja Cvi Jáir, a New Yorkban élő héber költő, aki fiatalabb korában – de olykor azóta is – súlyt helyez arra, hogy legszebb verseit magyarul is publikálja.

Oberlander Báruch határtalan ambícióval látott munkához. Hívja-várja azokat, akik az ősi forrásból akarják oltani a szomjukat és életformájával, lángoló hitével másokat is magával ragad. A hittérítők buzgalmával dolgozik – de csak a zsidókat akarja közelebb hozni hitünkhöz. Más hitet valló emberek megtérítésével – népünk sok évszázados hagyományának megfelelően – nem foglalkozik. Ez nem tartozik az ügykörébe.

Ottlétemkor házi ünnepséget rendezett az otthonában elul hó 18-án. Ez kifejezetten chászid emléknap. Tudnivaló, hogy a Bást – a Báál Sém Tov – és az első, a dinasztia alapító lubavicsi rebbe – akit a hívei Ádmur házákén-ként emlegetnek – ezen a napon született.

Akik eljöttek az Oberlander Báruch által szervezett ünnepségre, azok egyszerre több fogalommal ismerkedhettek meg. Nem tudták, eddig nem tudhatták, mi fán terem a chaszidizmus, s mindent, ami ebből a fogalomból deriválható most tanulták meg.

– Lesz foganatja a munkájának?

Kérdésemre nagyon őszintén válaszolt:

– Ha rajtam múlik – lesz. De nem rajtam múlik. Minden az Isten kezében van. Mi, a lubavicsi rebbe hívei és tanításainak végrehajtói az Isten igéjét terjesztjük. Elhintjük ezeket az igéket a zsidó szívekben és lelkekben, amiket igyekszünk zsidó szellemiséggel öntözni – nehogy Isten őrizz és ments – kiszáradjanak.

Oberlander Báruch tudomást szerzett arról, hogy Nagykőrösön népes – viszonylag népes – zsidó gyülekezet él elhagyottan. Olyanok ők, mint a zsidó világ végvári vitézei. Senki sem nyitja rájuk az ajtót. Sem szombaton, sem a nagyünnepeken.

Elhatározta, hogy közöttük tölti a Ros Hásáná ünnepét. Amikor ennek odajutott a híre, olyan hatása volt a lélekben nehezen várt vendégnek, hogy azok is bejelentették imádkozási szándékukat, akik az utolsó évtizedekben a templom környékét is nagy ívben kerülték el.

Már ez a Ros Hásánái misszió is fényesen igazolta, hogy Oberlander Báruch és fiatal felesége nem hiába tölti az idejét Magyarországon. Isten áldása van a munkájukon.

Benedek Pál
(Új Kelet, 1989. október 5.)

A fenti idézet szerint 1989 szeptember hónap utolsó napjaiban érkezett meg New York-ból a Chabad Lubavics orthodox közösség fiatal rabbija, így a zsidó újévet (Rós Hásáná-t; 5750 Tisri 1.) már Magyarországon ünnepelte. Az érdekesség kedvéért meg kell itt említeni, hogy a tárgyalt újév egybeesett az 1999.08.11-én realizálódott napfogyatkozással hatásfokozott kozmikus keresztet megelőző utólsó olyan konstellációval, ami szintén a Shem ha-Mephorash-nak ("Isten 72 szellemének") volt a kozmikus forrása:

1989. szeptember 29. 21:47 UT (5750 Tisri 1. - Rós Hásáná)
Nap-Hold-Mars konjunkció:6,7°Mérleg; -Szaturnusz-Uránusz
-Neptunusz quadrat:7,6°/1,5°/9,6°Bak;
-Jupiter oppozíció:9,5°Rák (6,1°/8,1°)
- Hans-Dietrich Genscher külügyminiszter a prágai NSZK nagykövetségen 1989.09.30-án este jelentette be az ott menedéket kereső kelet-német állampolgároknak, hogy kiutazhatnak az NSZK-ba
Az 1989. évi átalakulás

http://www.hebcal.com/converter/?gd=30& ... ebrew+date
Hebcal Jewish Calendar
Date Converter
Sat, 30 September 1989 = 1st of Tishrei, 5750

http://soc.qc.cuny.edu/wordpress/wp-con ... nglish.pdf
Chabad’s Lost Messiah
(91-92.) And indeed, on dozens of occasions the Rebbe indicated that he viewed himself as the physical embodiment of mal¬chut. In his 1989 Rosh Hashana speech, for example, he claimed that,
All of the above is enhanced by the unique nature of the present year, tav-shin-nun, a “year of miracles.” The Hebrew for “miracle”also has the connotation “uplifted,” i.e., it refers to a level that is elevated above the natural order….
The concept of miracles also relates to the custom (quoted by the previous rebbe) of mentioning the nessi’im (pl., “princes”)… on Rosh Hashana.
The word nassi (sing., “prince”) also means “uplifted” and is used regard¬ing an individual who is elevated above the people as a whole as we find in regard to King Shaul, who was described as being so tall that his shoulders were higher than the heads of the people.
Our Sages, however, explain that “a nassi is the entire people” and that each member of the people has a spark of the nassi’s soul within his soul. Therefore, all the physical and spiritual necessities required by the people are drawn down to them by the nassi. Furthermore, the nassi lifts the people up to a higher level. For this reason, it is appropriate to mention the nessi’im on Rosh Hashana.
Our Sages teach that God relates to us in a manner of “measure for measure.” Thus, in order to merit the present “year of miracles, ”each Jew must begin a miraculous order of behavior, i.e., take on good resolutions regarding his service of Torah, prayer, and deeds of kindness which totally surpass that which could be expected of him based on his behavior in previous years.
This will serve as a vessel to contain the blessings of the present year, a “year of miracles.” Surely, this will include the greatest miracle, the mes¬sianic redemption, when “as in the days of your exodus from Egypt, I will show you wonders.” God will “sound the great shofar for our freedom,” bringing the Messiah. His coming is associated with the revelation of the yehida, the essence of the soul of every Jew. Then, it will be revealed how “Israel and the Holy One, blessed be he, are all one.”32

The “nassi, ”referred to by the Rebbe as the yehida, is the soul that contains within it the souls of all Jewish people. Here, in language obscure to the outsider but plain to his followers, the Rebbe stated that this leader is none other than himself. He claims, in other words, that he is the mes¬siah—the redeemer who has not yet been revealed, but whose revelation is nonetheless imminent.
It would appear from his speech that the Rebbe viewed all of human history as flowing inexorably toward the decisive moment when he, as the final descendant of a line of tzaddikim, would be required to act as the savior of humanity. It must be emphasized: In spite of all his scientificeducation, the Rebbe’s worldview was based entirely on the Kabbala, and can be understood only in its light.33 According to his mystical belief sys¬tem, the fact that he was the seventh rebbe in the Lubavitcher dynasty was not accidental, but rather an event of divine significance, an eschatological occurrence that marked the beginning of the end times. Guided by this theory, the Rebbe no doubt felt that the weight of redemption lay entirely on his shoulders. He was therefore determined to fulfill that destiny to the best of his abilities.


Feltehetőleg ez a nap volt a tervezett kezdete is a Chabad Lubavics Magyarországon történő tevékenységének.

A lubavicsi Chabad haszid mozgalom néhai vezetőjének a halála napját (1996.06.12., New York) ismerjük, de szerintem a pontos születési dátumát nem! A hivatalos magyarázatok szerint a rebbe 1902.04.18-án (5602 Niszán 11-én) született Ukrajnában:

1902.04.18. 12:19 UT +3.00 Nyikolajev (Ukrajna)

http://www.zsido.com/szoveg/12/Rebbe
Életrajz
Menachem Mendel Schneerson rabbi
(1902–1994)
Menachem Mendel Schneerson 1902. április 18-án (az 5662. év niszán havának tizenegyedik napján) az Ukrajna déli részén fekvő Nyikolajev városkában született.

http://www.de.chabad.org/library/articl ... -Rebbe.htm
Rabbiner Menachem Mendel Schneerson s.A.
11. Nissan 5602 (18. April 1902) – 3. Tammus 5754 (12. Juni 1994)

http://www.chabad.org/therebbe/timeline ... ldhood.htm
The Lubavitcher Rebbe, Menachem Mendel Schneerson, was born on Friday, April 18, 1902 (Nissan 11 on the Hebrew calendar) in the Ukrainian-Russian town of Nikolaev.

Ezzel szemben más források arról adnak hírt, hogy a rebbe korábbi papírjain 1895.03.01. áll születési dátuma gyanánt...:

1895.03.01. 12:00 UT +3.00 Nyikolajev (Ukrajna)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rabbi_Mena ... Schneerson
The accepted date of his birth is 11 Nissan 5662, which is equivalent to April 5, 1902 OS or April 18, 1902 NS. (Dates in March 1895 appear on his Russian passport[5] and his application for French citizenship,[6] he swore on his 1941 visa application that he "was born on the 1st day of March 1895 at Nicolaev, Kherson, Soviet Union" (now Mykolaiv, Ukraine) and was already "46 years of age" in 1941,[7][8][9] and he affirmed on his U.S. draft registration card that he was 47 during World War Two and was born in "Nicolaav" on "Mar 1 1895".[10] These statements are not considered credible evidence of his true date of birth because Jews born under the czars may have needed to claim false ages to avoid the Russian army draft.[5])

Rabbi Schneerson as the Jewish Messiah
Before Rabbi Schneerson's death in 1994 many Chabad Hasidim believed that he was soon to become manifest as the Messiah (moshiach) — an event that would herald the Messianic Age and the construction of the Third Temple. Books and pamphlets were written arguing that the Rabbi was the Messiah (moshiach).

Kép
The Chabad messianist flag. The Hebrew word is "Moshiach", meaning "Messiah".

http://books.google.de/books?id=QuWQ3Di ... 95&f=false
Samuel Heilman and Menachem Friedman: The Rebbe - The Life and Afterlife of Menachem Mendel Schneerson (2010) ISBN 978-0-691-13888-6
(66.) Like so much else in his story, even the date of his birth is ambiguous. While the accepted birthday, according to his own word, was Sabbath eve, April 18, 1902 (11 Nissan 5662, according to the Jewish calendar), his Soviet passport indicates an earlier date, March 2, 1895, a discrepancy having to do with the constant need of Jews born under the rule of the czars to find ways of avoiding the army draft, which many understood meant the inevitable loss of young Jewsish boys to secularity and unbelief.

http://soc.qc.cuny.edu/faculty/the-rebb ... materials/
Kép1
1928.04.27., Berlin (32 éves)

Kép2

Kép3
Született: 1895.03.01.

Kép4

Kép5

Kép6

Kép7

Tulajdonképpen teljesen lényegtelen lenne, hogy mikor született ténylegesen a lubavicsi rebbe, ha a mozgalma nem tartotta volna és ma is tartaná őt az Ószövetség várt Messiás királyának:

http://www.hebraisztika.hu/attachments/00000151.pdf
A 36 igaz ember, avagy
A tökéletesen titokzatos társaság
A zsidó hagyomány hamis messiásnak tekint mindenkit, aki ekként lépett fel a történelemben, kivéve a Chábád lubavicsi irányzatot, akik a nemrég meghalt amerikai rabbijukat messiásnak tekintették, és most az előtt a probléma előtt állnak, ami előtt a kereszténység, hogy a messiás második visszatérését kell várniuk.

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Menachem_Mendel_Schneerson
Menachem Mendel Schneerson (* 18. April 1902 in Nikolajew, Ukraine; † 12. Juni 1994 in New York) war über vier Jahrzehnte das Oberhaupt – „der Rebbe“ – der Chabad-Bewegung, einer chassidischen Gruppierung innerhalb des orthodoxen Judentums. Gegen Ende seines Lebens wurde er von vielen Chabad als der Messias angesehen, auch nach seinem Tod und der bisher ausgebliebenen Auferstehung glauben einige jüdische Gruppen weiterhin daran, in ihm sei der Messias erschienen. (siehe Messias-Kontroverse).

http://www.kingmessiah.com/
Chabad EN
Kép

http://www.kingmessiah.com/115/1068.html
Kép
Kép
The lubavitcher rebbe king moshiach shlita puts the crown on the sefer torah written to greet moshiach on erev yud shvat 1970

Azt nyugodtan meg lehet állapítani az eddig felmerült két születési dátum (1895.03.01, és 1902.04.18.) alapján, hogy ezekre hivatkozva semmiképpen nem lehetett a Shem ha-Mephorash-t figyelembe véve messiás Menáchem Mendel Schneerson rabbi...

Az ószövetségi messianisztikus elképzelések szerint kétféle messiás képzelhető el, melyek természetesen nem azonosak:

Link
Kép
Mashiach ben Josef (Messiás, József fia)

és

Kép
Mashiach ben David (Messiás, Dávid fia)

"Mashiach ben Josef"-fel kapcsolatosan az i.sz. 25 április elsején keresztre feszíttetett Názáreti Jézust lehetne megemlíteni, de hasonló születési adottsággal rendelkezett Sabbatáj Cví és Jiddu Krishnamurti is, a Shem ha-Mephorash figyelembevétele mellett:

Jézus születése: i.e. 8. 02.10.
-7.02.10 12:11 UT +2.00 jeruzsálemi idő (3753. Adar 1.)
Nap-Hold-Mars-Szaturnusz-Uránusz konjunkció:20,1°/20,1°/29,3°/27,8°/27,4°Vízöntő
(9,2°)
(Vénusz-Jupiter sextil)

Sabbatáj Cví születése:
1624.08.14. 06:10 UT +2.00 Smyrna (Izmir)
Nap-Hold konjunkció:21,6°Oroszlán; Mars-Szaturnusz-Uránusz konjunkció:22,8°/22,2°/17,5°Oroszlán
(5,3°)

Jiddu Krishnamurti születése:
1897.11.24. 09:19 UT
Nap-Hold-Mars-Szaturnusz-Uránusz konjunkció:2,4°/2,4°/1,6°/3,2°Nyilas/29,5°Skorpió
(3,7°)

A három említett személyt messiásként tartják (tartották) nyilván: Jézust a keresztények; Sabbatáj Cví-t a sabbatianizmus - Dönmeh; Jiddu Krishnamurtit pedig a Skót Ritus 33. fokozatú szabadkőműves nagymesterei, Charles Webster Leadbeater (1847 -1934) és Annie Besant (1847 -1933).

"Mashiach ben David"-dal kapcsolatosan szintén két személyt említenék, mépedig Jacob Lejbowicz Frank-ot és Immánuelt, a "végidőkre", azaz napjainkra várt ószövetségi messiást:

Jacub Lejbowicz Frank születése:
1726.05.02. 01:49 UT
Nap-Hold konjunkció:11,3°Bika; -Uránus oppozíció11,2°Skorpió; -Mars quadrat10,8°Oroszlán; -Szaturnusz oppozíció3,5°Vízöntő
(7,8°)

1999.08.11. 12:09 UT
Nap-Hold konjunkció:18,4°Oroszlán; -Uránusz oppozíció:14,7°Vízöntő; -Mars quadrat:16,9°Skorpió; -Szaturnusz oppozíció:16,9°Bika
(3,7°)
(teljes napfogyatkozás!)
- A Napbaöltözött Asszony (Fekete Madonna) megszüli a gyermekét (Jelenések könyve 12,9-13).
- A holtak "első feltámadása" (Jelenések könyve 20,5).
- II. János Pál pápa szerint Európának az Úrral történt találkozása.
- Jézus "második eljövetele", ami valójában az ószövetségi messiásnak, Immánuelnek volt a születése (Ézsiás 7,10-14; 11,1-3; 66,7-8; Mikeás 5,1-2; Jelenések könyve 12,5).
- Az asztrológiában, kabbalahban, hermetikus ismeretekben és a héber nyelvben is járatos Nostradamus, aki a Prieuré de Sion titkos társaságnak a tagja volt, szintén erre az égi eseményre hívta fel már évszázadokkal korábban a figyelmet (Centuriák X. 72.), ami a "rettegés nagy királyának", JHVH-kozmikus Krisztusnak kellett az eljövetelét eredményezze.


Menáchem Mendel Schneerson rabbit csak abban az esetben lehetne messiásnak nevezni, amennyiben a születési dátuma megegyezne Jiddu Krishnamurti-éval (1897.11.2.). Krishnamurti születési időpontját egyes források tévesen szintén 1895-re (május 11-re) teszik, aminek természetesen semmi alapja nem lehet...

Ha a lubavicsi rebbe 1897.11.24-én látta meg a napvilágot (amit érthető módon titkoltak volna eddig), abban az esetben jogos a követői által hangoztatott messiássága, de ettől függetlenül az Ószövetség messianisztikus elképzelései a Jelenések könyvével egyetemben nem rá vártak, hanem Immánuelre, aki nem lehet értelemszerűen azonos az 1996.06.12-én elhunyt rebbével és Jézussal sem:

1897.11.24. 12:19 UT +3.00 Nyikolajev (Ukrajna)
"MC"-Nap-Hold-Mars-Szaturnusz-Uránusz konjunkció:2,4°/2,4°/1,6°/3,2°Nyilas/29,5°Skorpió
(3,7°)

Ez a Nap-Hold-Mars-Szaturnusz-Uránusz konjunkció (együttállás) ugyanúgy a Shem ha-Mephorashnak ("Isten 72 szellemének") volt az egyik kozmikus forrása, mint az ószövetségi messianisztikus elképzelések tervezett megvalósítójának a születését szignáló napfogyatkozással hatásfokozott kozmikus kereszt (1999.08.11.) azzal a különbséggel, hogy 1897.11.24-én a Nap mögött sorakoztak fel a negatív hatásúnak számító Mars, Szaturnusz, Uránusz planéták, így a Földről néve erős hatáscsökkenést szenvedtek, mint Jézus születésekor. !999.08.11-én viszont a keresztet alkotó égitestek teljes mértékben kifejthették a hatásukat, ami kifejezetten ellentétesnek mondható az ősi asztrológiai szabályzók szerint. A Jelenések könyve szerint is Immánuel a kozmikus sárkány szülötte volt:

Jelenések könyve
12,1 A napba öltözött asszony
Ekkor nagy jel tűnt fel az égen: egy asszony a napba öltözve, és a lába alatt a hold, a fején pedig tizenkét csillagból álló korona;
12,2 várandós volt, és vajúdva, szüléstől gyötrődve kiáltozott.
12,3 Feltűnt egy másik jel is az égen: íme, egy hatalmas tűzvörös sárkány, amelynek hét feje és tíz szarva volt, és a hét fején hét diadém;
12,4 farka magával sodorta az ég csillagainak egyharmadát, és ledobta a földre. És a sárkány odaállt a szülni készülő asszony elé, hogy amikor szül, felfalja a gyermekét.
12,5 Az asszony fiúgyermeket szült, aki vasvesszővel legeltet minden népet. A gyermek elragadtatott az Istenhez, az ő trónusához,

12,9 És levettetett a hatalmas sárkány, az ősi kígyó, akit ördögnek és Sátánnak hívnak, aki megtéveszti az egész földkerekséget; levettetett a földre, és vele együtt angyalai is levettettek.
12,10 Hallottam, hogy egy hatalmas hang megszólal a mennyben: "Most lett a mi Istenünké az üdvösség, az erő és a királyság, a hatalom pedig az ő Krisztusáé, mert levettetett testvéreink vádlója, aki a mi Istenünk színe előtt éjjel és nappal vádolta őket.

12,13 A sárkány harca a földön
Amikor látta a sárkány, hogy levettetett a földre, üldözőbe vette az asszonyt, aki a fiúgyermeket szülte;

Ámos
5,18 Jaj azoknak, akik az Úr napját kívánják! Minek nektek az Úr napja? Sötét lesz az, nem világos!
5,19 Olyan lesz, mint mikor valaki oroszlán elől fut, és medve támad rá, vagy bemegy a házba, kezével a falhoz támaszkodik, és kígyó marja meg.
5,20 Bizony, sötét lesz az Úr napja, nem világos, vaksötét lesz, fénysugár nélkül!

8,9 És lészen azon a napon, azt mondja az Úr Isten: Lenyugtatom a napot délben, és besötétítem a földet fényes nappal.

Az eddigiekből is kitűnik, hogy Menáchem Mendel Schneerson rabbi semmiképpen nem lehetett azonos az Ószövetségben és a Jelenések könyvében is megemlített, betervezett ószövetségi messiással, akit a Pál-féle kereszténység szerintem minden alapot nélkülözve "Jézus második eljövetele" gyanánt várt eddig...

Az ószövetségi messianisztikus elképzelések megvalósulása nem a 13 évvel ezelőtt megszületett Immánuelnek az érdeme, hanem a benne hívő tömegeké, tehát tulajdonképpen a messiásnak kizárólagosan spirituális szerepe lesz feltehetőleg:

http://www.zsido.com/konyv/307/3611/Zsi ... a_fenyeben
A Messiás a modernkori zsidó filozófia fényében
Chászid filozófia
a lubavicsi rebbe, Menáchem Mendel
Schneerson rabbi írásai alapján
Fény az alagút végén
A végső megváltás nem a távoli jövő álma, hanem közeli valóság.
(A Rebbe)
Most már minden rajtunk múlik.

Mindent el kell követnetek, hogy elhozzátok igaz megváltónkat! Nem elég, ha jól hangzó jelszavakat szajkózunk. Mindegyikőtöknek tetteitekkel kell elhozni a végső megváltást. Rajtatok áll, hogy létrehozzátok-e a Messiás harmóniával teli, tökéletes világát.


http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chabad#Die ... ontroverse
Rabbi Menachem Schneerson sprach bereits in seiner ersten veröffentlichten Tora-Interpretation (Maamar Bati Le-Gani, Jud Schwat 5710) davon, dass es Aufgabe seiner Generation sei, die Ankunft des Messias zu erwirken.

http://www.ou.org/chagim/sefira/mystery.htm
October 5, 1995
The Mystery of Lag Ba'Omer
Rabbi Pinchas Stolper
It is not enough to wait for the Messiah's coming; we must toil to perfect our Torah lives if we are to bring about his speedy arrival. Only if we learn from the lesson of Rabbi Akiva's students will we understand that the coming of the Messiah depends on us.


Néhány idézet és videó Menáchem Mendel Schneerson-nal kapcsolatosan:

http://epa.oszk.hu/00800/00804/00043/3372.html
http://www.hetek.hu/hit_es_ertekek/1998 ... tenelemben
1998. 12. 19. (II/51)
Ruff Tibor: Hamis messiások a zsidó történelemben
Századunk eddig egyetlen kiemelkedő zsidó messiásjelöltje – mert keresztény, hindu és mindenféle más természetesen szép számmal van még (ezekről következő számunkban lesz szó – a szerk.) – a New York-i Menahem Mendel Schneerson volt. Ő a szintén erőteljesen kabbalista beállítottságú ún. lubavicsi habad hászidok 250 éves mozgalmának hetedik vezető rabbijaként legalább 250 ezer ultraortodox zsidóra gyakorolt befolyást, akiknek jelentős része még most, halála után is messiásként tiszteli. Messiási voltát ugyan ő maga nem erősítette meg, de nem is cáfolta, még akkor sem, amikor követőinek tömegei ezt kiáltozták ablaka alatt: "Mesterünk, rabbink, tanítónk, Messiás Király, örökké élj!" Idősebb korára teljes mértékben megbénult, beszédképességét is elvesztette, így már sem cáfolni, sem megerősíteni nem tudta, talán nem is akarta ezt a mind szélesebb körben elterjedő nézetet. Követői a Tel-Aviv környéki sivatagban felépítették New York-i otthonának az utolsó tégláig pontos másolatát, hogy amikor Messiásként Izraelbe érkezik, legyen hol laknia. Még a "770 Eastern Parkway" házszám is ott van az ajtó felett.
A hászidizmus alapítójától származó rabbi fiaként nőve fel kiemelkedő értelmi képességekkel rendelkezett mind a Tóra, mind pedig a matematika és más tudományok területén. A Sorbonne-on szerzett mérnöki diplomát, tizenhét nyelven beszélt. Számos esetben tett a jövőre vonatkozó állításokat, így például előre megmondta, hogy a hatnapos háborút Izrael nyeri meg, valamint azt is, hogy az Öböl-háború purim ünnepének estéje előtt (február 28.) véget ér – a háború február 27-én éjfélkor ért véget. Ugyanakkor azt is előrejelezte, hogy a Messiás 1991. szeptember 9-én eljön, amiben tévedett. Karizmatikus személyiségének hatására számos ateista zsidó néhány perc alatt istenhívővé vált; és állítólag többen meggyógyultak imájának eredményeként. Tanítása szerint Izrael megváltásának utolsó lépcsőfoka bármelyik pillanatban elkövetkezhet már. Bibliamagyarázata szerint az Öböl-háború, a Szovjetunió széthullása, a zsidóság visszatérése a Szentföldre mind a Messiás ebben a generációban bekövetkező eljövetelének előjele. "Ami most történik, azok a szülési fájdalmak... A Messiás már csak egy szempillantásra lehet."
Követői súlyos betegségét is messiási jelnek vették: Ézsaiás próféta 53. fejezetének megfelelően az emberiség bűneit hordozza ezáltal. Amikor azonban egy tanítványának feltették a kérdést: mi lesz, ha a Messiás nem jön el a rebbe halála előtt, az így válaszolt: "Számomra ez olyan, mintha valaki azt mondaná: holnap nem kel fel a Nap."
Schneerson azóta meghalt. Tanítványai közül sokan feltámadását is várták egy ideig, a többi ortodox és ultraortodox zsidó nagy megbotránkozására. Amikor végül testét Izraelbe szállították eltemetni, az izraeli biztonsági szolgálatok speciális pszichológiai alakulatokat küldtek ki a repülőtérre a több tízezer hászid védelmére – akik közül még ma is számosan hisznek abban, hogy Schneerson volt/lesz a Messiás...(Következő számunkban a keresztény kultúrkörből származó hamis messiásokat és hamis prófétákat tekintjük át – a szerk.)

http://nepszava.com/2011/05/amerika/mar ... egeig.html
2011. május 14. szombat 22:21
Már csak 6 nap van hátra a világ végéig

Kép
A hetedik lubavicsi rebbe tizenhét éve halott, vannak azonban, akik a mai napig Messiást látnak benne. Fotó: AP

Különösen erős volt a messiásvárási hajlam a múlt század kilencvenes évei első (*saját megjegyzés: második) felében, amikor a cári Oroszországból elszármazott, de naggyá már az Egyesült Államokban lett Chabad Lubavics mozgalom szellemi vezetőjéről, a világi körökben is nagy tekintélyű Menáchem Mendel Schneersonról gyanították-hirdették egyre többen: ő a Messiás.

Az 1902-ben született Schneerson 1928-ban vette nőül a lubavicsi mozgalom hatodik rebbéje lányát, és a házasság hatvan évig tartott, noha gyermekük sohasem született. A Sorbonne-on hajómérnöki diplomát szerzett Schneersont apósa már életében megtette az akkor még igen szerény mozgalom igazgatójának, halála után, 1950-ben pedig ő lett a szellemi vezető örököse is. Chabad a vezetése alatt százezres világmozgalommá növekedett. Schneerson elképesztő energiákat ölt a világi zsidók valláshoz való közelítésébe, amelyet főként az oktatás révén látott elérhetőnek. Születésnapja, március 23-a nem véletlenül az Oktatás Napja 1983 óta az Egyesült Államokban.

A nyolcvanas-kilencvenes évek fordulóján a mozgalom tekintélyes része már Messiást látott Schneersonban, akiről első ízben még 1952-ben állította ezt egy rajongója nyilvánosan. Sokan arra alapozták meggyőződésüket, hogy a szellemi vezető önmagáról szólva kijelentette, a hetedik az utolsó lubavicsi rebbe, nyolcadik már nem lesz, valamint: ez a nemzedék már a megváltás nemzedéke lesz. Az 1991-es Öböl-háborút már a Messiás eljövetelét beharangozó eseménynek tartotta.

1992-ben a mozgalom egy része meghirdette az akkor már súlyos beteg Schneerson Messiás királlyá koronázását. A több ezer fős szertartást 1993. január 31-án ejtették meg, ám a józanabbak érvei hatására végül is eltekintettek attól, hogy az agyvérzésben megbénult kilencven éves embert, akit egy kórház intenzív osztályán ápoltak, csakugyan Messiássá kiáltsák ki.

Kép

Schneerson 1994-ben elhunyt anélkül, hogy a maimonidészi feltételeket teljesítette volna, így a Chabad többsége számára nyilvánvaló volt, hogy nem lehetett a Messiás. A lubavicsi messianisztikus teológia átgondolásra szorult, voltak azonban, akik nem kívántak belenyugodni a szomorú valóságba, így a mozgalomban harc tört ki a messianisztikusok és az anti-messianisztikusok között.

Előbbiek fanatikusan hirdették, hogy a rebbe nem is halt meg, vagy legalábbis nem a szó köznapi értelmében halott, és ilyen tartalmú hirdetéseket jelentettek meg a New York Timesban még évekkel a szellemi vezető halála után is. Amikor arra hívták fel a figyelmüket, hogy a messiási feltételek nem teljesültek, többek közt a Harmadik Templom sem épült fel, a messianisztikusok azt állították: de igenis felépült, csak épp nem Jeruzsálemben, hanem Brooklyban, az Eastern Parkway 770. alatt, ahol a mozgalom főhadiszállása található.

Kép
Az Eastern Parkway 770. Brooklynban épült volna fel a Harmadik Templom?

Ezek a hívek nem látogatják a rebbe sírját, nem emlékeznek meg halála évfordulójáról, úgy vélik: a rebbe él, csak rejtőzködik, de Messiásként nyilvánul meg előbb vagy utóbb. Van azonban a messiáshívő táborban olyan vélekedés is, miszerint Schneerson 1994-ben ténylegesen meghalt ugyan – de mégis visszatér Messiásként.

http://wn.com/rabbi_menachem_mendel_sch ... =viewCount
Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson
The Lubavitcher Rebbe...4:02
Tzama Lecha Nafshe Rebbe Chabad Lubavitch...6:08
rebbe...4:17
Chabad Lubavitch...Some Awsome Rebbe Pictures I Have....4:25
Biblia Antiguo Testamento Libros de Samuel El Rey David 4/16...10:06
A Chess Lesson...5:28
The Rebbe's message to the world about Moshiach....1:44
'Ashreinu' with the Lubavitcher Rebbe...1:49
Carlebach Havdala with Menachem Herman and Rabbi Lazer Brody...4:31
It's in Your Hands...6:45
Rabbi Yitzchak Kaduri...6:13
מְאָ֬ה לְךָ֨ נַפְש Rebbe Lubavitch :Tehilim 63...2:48
Funeral of the Previous Lubavitcher Rebbe...4:45

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PRnLuUKPt9k
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F2S8CKA1 ... re=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WrZqruin ... ure=fvwrel
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=887vWdyW ... re=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WnhMntRH ... re=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I5gfHCSR ... ure=relmfu
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=il77SOQU ... ure=relmfu
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N253828_ ... ure=relmfu
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fawm75qr ... ure=relmfu
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MeBYuSxh ... ure=relmfu
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H3PW2ceG ... ure=relmfu
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mtRcwXoD ... ure=relmfu
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JPQuAQH7 ... ure=relmfu
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHBiT6eJ ... ure=relmfu
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TB_khjit ... ure=relmfu
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A3NHKLm9 ... re=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nWwtqDsN ... ure=relmfu
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w99Ef4Ka ... ure=relmfu
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rQK1pBJi ... ure=relmfu
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gUjMYyEO ... re=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ApK4VWSD ... ure=relmfu
Benutzeravatar
Admin
Forum Admin
 
Beiträge: 123
Registriert: 05.2013
Wohnort: Deutschland
Geschlecht:

Re: Messiás volt-e Menáchem Mendel Schneerson?

Beitragvon Admin » 26. Mai 2013 18:02

Klaus Matefi
Messiás volt e Menáchem Mendel Schneerson?

(Második rész)



A Chábád Lubavics Brooklyn-ban (New York-ban) található "főhadiszállásán" 1986-tól rengeteg látogatót fogadott vasárnaponként Menáchem Mendel Schneerson rabbi, és megajándékozta őket kivétel nélkül egy ropogós (néha 2-3 darab) papír egydollárossal:

http://www.de.chabad.org/library/articl ... -REBBE.htm
KAP. IV - DER REBBE.
Das Rätsel Menachem Mendel Schneerson.
Er war unablässig tätig, sei es, dass er sich mit Bittstellern in Privataudienzen traf, die oft bis zum Morgengrauen dauerten, oder ob er jeden Sonntag stundenlang auf den Beinen war, um Segen und Dollarnoten an die Tausenden von Menschen zu verteilen, die sich vor seinem Büro versammelten, oder sei es, dass er Chabads Aktivitäten auf der ganzen Welt leitete.

Wenngleich ihn seine schlechte Gesundheit zwang, nach 1981 seine Privataudienzen einzuschränken, führte er 1986 die Praxis mit den »Sonntag-Dollars« ein, wobei er einmal in der Woche sieben oder acht Stunden lang in einer Nische vor seinem Büro stand und nacheinander Tausende von Besuchern empfing, mit jedem kurz sprach, bevor er ihm einen knisternden Dollarschein reichte, den der Empfänger spenden sollte. Er behielt diese wöchentlichen Empfänge bei, bis ihn im März 1992 ein Infarkt niederstreckte; damals war er beinahe neunzig Jahre alt.

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chabad
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Menachem_Mendel_Schneerson
Ab April 1986 wurden sie gänzlich abgeschafft, stattdessen empfing Schneerson jeden Sonntag Tausende Menschen, die einzeln von ihm einen US-Dollar-Schein erhielten, der für wohltätige Zwecke (hebr. Zedaka) gespendet werden sollte.[5]

http://www.chabad.org/therebbe/article_ ... resent.htm
What Does A Dollar from the Rebbe Represent?
The Rebbe, of righteous memory, stood for hours distributing dollars and blessings to thousands of people every Sunday, and on other occasions. The Rebbe’s intention was that the recipient should give the dollar to charity. In this way, explained the Rebbe, when two meet, it should benefit another.

Usually, instead of giving the actual dollar bill to charity, the recipient would keep it and give away another dollar in its place. I know it was a long time ago, but do you remember if you did that? If you do not remember, I would recommend giving a dollar to charity as soon as possible.
When Two People Meet

The Rebbe commonly requested that we go out of our way to share something we have with one who lacks it, even if it isn’t much.

Receiving a dollar from the Rebbe gives one the responsibility of helping another. Whether it’s physical charity with money or goods, or time and effort, going out of your way for another’s benefit is what this dollar represents.

The dollar should serve as a constant reminder that the Jewish people are all about helping others, both spiritually and materially.

For this reason, many keep the dollar in their wallets, or in a place where it can easily be seen.

http://www.chabad.org/therebbe/timeline ... ollars.htm
1986: "Sunday Dollars"
In 1986, the Rebbe began conducting a weekly "receiving line." Each Sunday, the Rebbe would stand in a small room near his office as thousands of men, women and children filed past to see him and receive his blessing. Many used the opportunity to pose a question and receive a word of advice. To each of them the Rebbe gave a dollar bill, appointing them as his personal agent (shaliach) to give it to the charity of their choice.

Why the dollar? The Rebbe explained his custom by quoting his father-in-law, Rabbi Yosef Yitzchak of Lubavitch, who would often say: "When two people meet, something good should result for a third." The Rebbe wished to elevate each of the thousands of encounters of the day to something more than a meeting of two individuals; he wanted that each should involve the performance of a "mitzvah" (good deed), particularly a mitzvah that also benefits another individual.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Menachem_Mendel_Schneerson
http://www.answers.com/topic/menachem-m ... Dollars.22
"Sunday Dollars"
In 1986,Rabbi Schneerson again began to regularly greet people individually. This time, the personal meetings took the form of a weekly receiving line in "770". Almost every Sunday, thousands of people would line up to meet briefly with Schneerson and receive a one-dollar bill, which was to be donated to charity. People filing past Schneerson would often take this opportunity to ask him for advice or to request a blessing. This event is usually referred to as "Sunday Dollars."[54] Beginning in 1989, these events were recorded on videotape. Posthumously, hundreds of thousands these encounters have been posted online[55] for public access.

http://mysite.verizon.net/resxzz1s/gabb ... e/id1.html
Published Winter 5754
A Trip to Brooklyn
(The following was originally written in the summer of ’91, and describes a trip to Crown Heights, Brooklyn, in which I accompanied Reb Zalman Schachter-Shalomi and his youngest son, Yotam, to meet the late Lubavitcher Rebbe, Reb Menachem Mendel Schneerson. I believe this trip was the last time Zalman saw the Rebbe before his recent passing.)

"The line is open to anyone," Zalman explained. "First the Rebbe meets the women and then the men. He gives you a dollar bill, a blessing which encourages each person to perform acts of tzedaka and mitzvoth."

The line kept moving until Reb Zalman stood before the Lubavitcher Rebbe. A noticeable change of expression came over the Rebbe’s face: a look of love and surprise. He handed Zalman a dollar bill and began speaking in Yiddish. As he spoke, he gave Zalman a second dollar bill and then a third. The other chossids in the room listened with interest to the Rebbe’s words and marked as he gave Zalman the third bill. Although they wanted to keep the immense line moving quickly, they listened attentively.

Kép
Ezt egy nemes indíttatású aktusnak is fel lehetne fogni, hiszen a szegény embernek akár egy dollár is jól jöhet. Mivel az alábbi videókon olyan személyek kaptak egydollárt a rebbétől, mint Moshe Katsav (2000.08.01. - 2007.07.01-ig Izrael miniszterelnöke), Silvan Shalom (2003. február - 2006. januárjáig Izrael külügyminisztere; 2009.03.32-től pedig miniszterelnök helyettes), Ron Nachman (politikus; polgármester Izraelben), Roni Milo (politikus; 1988 környezetvédelmi miniszter; 1990 munkaügyi miniszter; 1993 - 1998 Tel Aviv polgármestere; 2001 - 2003 a Sharon kormányában miniszter), Shlomo Gazit (az izraeli hadsereg generálisa); vagy rabbik, akik nem feltétlenül szorulnak rá erre az ajándékra, így a megoldást valószínűleg máshol kell keresni
Ezek szerint az úgynevezett "Sunday Dollars"-nak ("Vasárnapi dollár"-nak) más jellegű, rendeltetésű szerepe kellett legyen. Ha szemügyre vesszük a tárgyalt papírpénznek a hátoldalát, máris világosabbá válhat a számunkra az, hogy feltételezhetően valamilyen misztériumra történő utalás cáljából ajándékozhatta meg a rebbe minden látogatóját ezzel.

Az US dollár Federal Reserve Note, azaz a Federal Reserve Bank-nak (magánbankok egyesülése) a tulajdona, amit az Egyesült Államok lakossága kamat ellenében használhat fizetőeszköz gyanánt.

A papírpénz hátoldalának a középső részében látható az "IN GOD WE TRUST" felirat annyit jelent, hogy "MI BÍZUNK ISTENBEN".

A legtöbbet mondó jelkép a bal oldalon látható illuminátus piramis, ami utal az ószövetségi misztériumok kozmikus keresztjeinek az összességére:

Bild
(A korábbi időkben realizálódott Nap-Hold konjunkciók esetében az ábrákon a Hold elmarad a Naptól. Ez abból adódik, hogy a program forgalomba hozatala után a NASA egy "Delta T" tényező bekalkulálása miatt változtatott a Hold pozícióján.)

A feltételezett Ábrahám emberáldozatának a kísérletétől Immánuel születési időponjával bezárólag (i.e. 1811.02.23-tól - 1999.08.11-ig) 14 darab azonos felépítésű kozmikus kereszt realizálódott, melyek egyaránt a Shem ha-Mephorash-nak ("Isten 72 szellemének") a kozmikus forrásai. Az amerikai egy dolláron ábrázolt illuminátus piramis képe zárja az animációs fotón látható kozmikus keresztek sorát. A 14 keresztre a piramis 14 fokozata (13 + a "mindent látó szem" - "All Seeing Eye") utal. A 14. kereszt (1999.08.11.), amit az említett "mindent látó szem" jelképez, az összes közül a legkiemelkedőbb hatású volt.

Az egydolláros hátoldalán látható kép jelkép az USA címeréről származik:

Link
Kép
Az USA címere

Kép
Az USA címerének a hátoldala

Ezen a fotón a piramist 72 szegment alkotja, nincs kizárva, hogy ezzel a Shem ha-Mephorash-ra ("Isten 72 szellemére") történt az utalás.

Az USA-ban már 1782-ben használatos volt az a címer, ami Franklin Delano Roosevelt (elnök: 1933.03.04. - 1945.04.12.; a Skót Ritus 32. fokú beavatottja) elnök rendelete alapján került fel 1933-ban az egy dollárra is.

A piramis alatt található a "Novus Ordo Seclorum" ("A Korok Új Rendje") felirat, ami szoros kapcsolatban lehet a XX. század végén, 1990. szeptember 11-én George H. W. Bush által bejelentett "New World Order"-rel ("Új Világrenddel"):

http://hu.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%9Aj_Vil%C3%A1grend
Új Világrend
Az Új Világrend (New World Order) egy olyan világberendezkedési, politikai és társadalmi elképzelés, mely szerint a Földet egyetlenegy ország alkotja, egy világkormánnyal, melynek állampolgára a világ összes embere, egységes fizetőeszközzel, eltörölt országhatárokkal, egységes jogrendszerrel.

Története
1990. szeptember 11-én, az Amerikai Egyesült Államok elnöke George H. W. Bush beszédet tartott, melyben először említi az új világrendet. Ezt a dátumot kötjük az új világrend hivatalos bejelentéséhez.

Az Új világrend kiépítését segítő törekvések első jelentős fázisa az Európai Unió létrehozása, mely egységesítette a pénznemet, eltörölte a vámot és könnyebbé tette az utazást, az EU tagállamai között.

Lehet-e vajon magasztosabb közös célja az emberiségnek, mint az idézetben olvasható első mondat?
Szerintem kizárt dolog, amennyiben a cél a KÖZJÓ, nem pedig a magánbankárok, olajmágnások, stb. továbbtollasodása a túlnyomó többség rovására...


Az idézet szerint "George H. W. Bush beszédet tartott, melyben először említi az új világrendet". Ez nem állja meg a helyét, ugyanis korábbi elnökök is hivatkoztak már a "New World Order"-re, azaz az "Új Világrendre":

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=3751
Richard Nixon
69 - Toasts of the President and Premier Chou En-lai of China at a Banquet Honoring the Premier in Peking.
February 25, 1972
You believe deeply in your system, and we believe just as deeply in our system. It is not our common beliefs that have brought us together here, but our common interests and our common hopes, the interest that each of us has to maintain our independence and the security of our peoples and the hope that each of us has to build a new world order in which nations and peoples with different systems and different values can live together in peace, respecting one another while disagreeing with one another, letting history rather than the battlefield be the judge of their different ideas.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=3658
Richard Nixon
375 - Remarks in Ashland, Kentucky.
October 26, 1972

But it was only an interlude; it was not peace that lasted. Because before the next generation grew up, the sons of those who had fought in World War I were fighting in World War II.

You remember V-J Day and V-E Day. I recall that on V-J Day I was in New York City, in Times Square, with my wife, and the wonderful elation that we all felt about the war--it was over. And then came the United Nations and all the hope for a new world order, and we thought, now we are going to have real peace.

And then the sons and the younger brothers of those who had fought, and many had died--350,000 in World War II--were fighting again in Korea.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=3832
Richard Nixon
141 - Fourth Annual Report to the Congress on United States Foreign Policy.
May 3, 1973

Over the next four years, the United States will be heavily engaged in giving substance to the new world order that now is taking shape. High on the agenda will be problems of world trade and of strengthening the international monetary system. These matters will be of special concern to Latin America as it continues to expand its exports outside the hemisphere.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=5297
Gerald Ford
602 - Remarks and a Question-and-Answer Session at the White House Conference on Domestic and Economic Affairs in Omaha
October 1, 1975

THE PRESIDENT. Well of course, at the Seventh Special Session that took place a month ago, Secretary Kissinger made a very broad speech in response to the demands of the underdeveloped nations. They, of course, talk about a new world order. We don't think their problems, the sale of their natural resources, necessarily argue for a new world economic order. We would rather talk in terms of taking each one of the commodities and handling them on a case-by-case basis--zinc, tin, bauxite, coffee, et cetera.

So, we are not going to be a part of any scheme to establish a new world order, a new world economic order. I want that crystal clear. But we will work with those nations, as Secretary Kissinger said, on a case-by-case basis of trying to assure them of adequate income from their natural resources.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=7738
Jimmy Carter
Visit of President Perez of Venezuela Toasts of the President and President Perez at a Dinner Honoring the Venezuelan President.
June 28, 1977

You, Mr. President, with true vision, have begun to speak .another language. Without saying so expressly, you have understood that selfishness has presided until now over the lukewarm conduct of the great nations.

It is indispensable that the industrial world understand that the order of priorities no longer has in their first places the East-West conflict and the stabilization of the traditional power blocs, and that now the major efforts must be exerted in the resolution of the North-South conflict in order to create a new international order, just and equitable.

It is necessary that the industrial world understand that the creation of that new world order demands bold initiatives and global solutions, with major changes in the living standards of the rich nations insofar as they may be derived from the exploitation of the poorer nations.

Mr. President, and Mrs. Carter, in our conversations we must talk about these and others of the many problems that deal with the bilateral relations between our two countries, with Latin America, with the Third World, and other aspects of world politics of common concern. We will have to talk about hidden conflicts in our hemisphere, of possible solutions, of the responsibilities of the United States and of our own.

With my words in this kind and friendly dinner expressive of the cordiality with which we have been received, I have wished to refer to fundamental aspects that commit the responsibility of nations and governments in the construction of the new world order, just and equitable.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=6781
Jimmy Carter
Visit of Lieutenant General Obasanjo of Nigeria Toasts of the President and Lieutenant General Obasanjo at a Dinner Honoring the Nigerian Head of State.
October 11, 1977

Mr. President, as you are aware, the dialog between the industrialized countries and the developing nations on the structure of a new world economic order ended inconclusively, and there was no agreement as to what system should replace the existing one.

We are encouraged to know that the United States is committed to work towards the creation of a more just world economic system, because we also desire the elimination of a situation in which nations of the world are prominently categorized as industrialized and developing states, haves and have-nots. I am happy that we are both committed to the creation of a new world order which will take due cognizance of the interdependence between states, a world in which nation states will relate to one another on the basis of equality, understanding, and mutual respect.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=43116
Ronald Reagan
Toasts of President Reagan and President Soeharto of Indonesia at the State Dinner
October 12, 1982

Indeed, there have been many efforts made to overcome these various disturbances. But the outcome has not ensured its total solution. In the framework of trying to find a fundamental solution and to achieve an overall improvement of the inequalities in the world, the one and only answer is that all nations, big or small, strong or weak, strive together, motivated by the firm determination to build a new world order which guarantees political justice, economic justice, and social justice.

Unavoidably, it must be the common stand and concerted efforts of all nations on our unitary planet, because with the growingly closer relation amongst nations, due to the progress brought about by the human civilization at present and in the future, whether we like it or not, we must consider the world as the common homeland of all nations.

I'm aware that it is not easy to build a new world order. There must be, therefore, concrete steps which will at least prevent the deterioration of world developments, which may cause our solitary world to fall into the abyss of greater disaster, which may probably terminate the history of man and mankind. In such a world situation, filled with anxiety, obviously the world's attention, particularly of the developing countries, is focused for its umpteenth time on the United States.


George H. W. Bush elnök, a Skull and Bones illuminátus titkos társaság tagja már 1990.08.30-án említette az "Új Világrendet", a tervezett Irak ellenes háborúval kapcsolatosan:

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=18792
George Bush
The President's News Conference on the Persian Gulf Crisis
August 30, 1990

The President. Well, I think on the second part of the question that we ought to get on with the business at hand, the shorter run business, which is the solution to this question: the making right the situation in Kuwait, meaning the pulling out of forces, obviously, and the restoration of the rulers. As I look at the countries that are chipping in here now, I think we do have a chance at a new world order, and I'd like to think that out of this dreary performance by Saddam Hussein there could be now an opportunity for peace all through the Middle East. But we have to be sure that what's been undertaken so far is successful before we can move to that other agenda, it seems to me.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=18820
George Bush
Address Before a Joint Session of the Congress on the Persian Gulf Crisis and the Federal Budget Deficit
September 11, 1990
Mr. President and Mr. Speaker and Members of the United States Congress, distinguished guests, fellow Americans, thank you very much for that warm welcome. We gather tonight, witness to events in the Persian Gulf as significant as they are tragic. In the early morning hours of August 2d, following negotiations and promises by Iraq's dictator Saddam Hussein not to use force, a powerful Iraqi army invaded its trusting and much weaker neighbor, Kuwait. Within 3 days, 120,000 Iraqi troops with 850 tanks had poured into Kuwait and moved south to threaten Saudi Arabia. It was then that I decided to act to check that aggression.

At this moment, our brave servicemen and women stand watch in that distant desert and on distant seas, side by side with the forces of more than 20 other nations. They are some of the finest men and women of the United States of America. And they're doing one terrific job. These valiant Americans were ready at a moment's notice to leave their spouses and their children, to serve on the front line halfway around the world. They remind us who keeps America strong: they do. In the trying circumstances of the Gulf, the morale of our service men and women is excellent. In the face of danger, they're brave, they're well-trained, and dedicated.

A soldier, Private First Class Wade Merritt of Knoxville, Tennessee, now stationed in Saudi Arabia, wrote his parents of his worries, his love of family, and his hope for peace. But Wade also wrote, "I am proud of my country and its firm stance against inhumane aggression. I am proud of my army and its men. I am proud to serve my country." Well, let me just say, Wade, America is proud of you and is grateful to every soldier, sailor, marine, and airman serving the cause of peace in the Persian Gulf. I also want to thank the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Powell; the Chiefs here tonight; our commander in the Persian Gulf, General Schwartzkopf; and the men and women of the Department of Defense. What a magnificent job you all are doing. And thank you very, very much from a grateful people. I wish I could say that their work is done. But we all know it's not.

So, if there ever was a time to put country before self and patriotism before party, the time is now. And let me thank all Americans, especially those here in this Chamber tonight, for your support for our armed forces and for their mission. That support will be even more important in the days to come. So, tonight I want to talk to you about what's at stake -- what we must do together to defend civilized values around the world and maintain our economic strength at home.

Our objectives in the Persian Gulf are clear, our goals defined and familiar: Iraq must withdraw from Kuwait completely, immediately, and without condition. Kuwait's legitimate government must be restored. The security and stability of the Persian Gulf must be assured. And American citizens abroad must be protected. These goals are not ours alone. They've been endorsed by the United Nations Security Council five times in as many weeks. Most countries share our concern for principle. And many have a stake in the stability of the Persian Gulf. This is not, as Saddam Hussein would have it, the United States against Iraq. It is Iraq against the world.

As you know, I've just returned from a very productive meeting with Soviet President Gorbachev. And I am pleased that we are working together to build a new relationship. In Helsinki, our joint statement affirmed to the world our shared resolve to counter Iraq's threat to peace. Let me quote: "We are united in the belief that Iraq's aggression must not be tolerated. No peaceful international order is possible if larger states can devour their smaller neighbors." Clearly, no longer can a dictator count on East-West confrontation to stymie concerted United Nations action against aggression. A new partnership of nations has begun.

We stand today at a unique and extraordinary moment. The crisis in the Persian Gulf, as grave as it is, also offers a rare opportunity to move toward an historic period of cooperation. Out of these troubled times, our fifth objective -- a new world order -- can emerge: a new era -- freer from the threat of terror, stronger in the pursuit of justice, and more secure in the quest for peace. An era in which the nations of the world, East and West, North and South, can prosper and live in harmony. A hundred generations have searched for this elusive path to peace, while a thousand wars raged across the span of human endeavor. Today that new world is struggling to be born, a world quite different from the one we've known. A world where the rule of law supplants the rule of the jungle. A world in which nations recognize the shared responsibility for freedom and justice. A world where the strong respect the rights of the weak. This is the vision that I shared with President Gorbachev in Helsinki. He and other leaders from Europe, the Gulf, and around the world understand that how we manage this crisis today could shape the future for generations to come.

The test we face is great, and so are the stakes. This is the first assault on the new world that we seek, the first test of our mettle. Had we not responded to this first provocation with clarity of purpose, if we do not continue to demonstrate our determination, it would be a signal to actual and potential despots around the world. America and the world must defend common vital interests -- and we will. America and the world must support the rule of law -- and we will. America and the world must stand up to aggression -- and we will. And one thing more: In the pursuit of these goals America will not be intimidated.

Vital issues of principle are at stake. Saddam Hussein is literally trying to wipe a country off the face of the Earth. We do not exaggerate. Nor do we exaggerate when we say Saddam Hussein will fail. Vital economic interests are at risk as well. Iraq itself controls some 10 percent of the world's proven oil reserves. Iraq plus Kuwait controls twice that. An Iraq permitted to swallow Kuwait would have the economic and military power, as well as the arrogance, to intimidate and coerce its neighbors -- neighbors who control the lion's share of the world's remaining oil reserves. We cannot permit a resource so vital to be dominated by one so ruthless. And we won't.

Recent events have surely proven that there is no substitute for American leadership. In the face of tyranny, let no one doubt American credibility and reliability. Let no one doubt our staying power. We will stand by our friends. One way or another, the leader of Iraq must learn this fundamental truth. From the outset, acting hand in hand with others, we've sought to fashion the broadest possible international response to Iraq's aggression. The level of world cooperation and condemnation of Iraq is unprecedented. Armed forces from countries spanning four continents are there at the request of King Fahd of Saudi Arabia to deter and, if need be, to defend against attack. Moslems and non-Moslems, Arabs and non-Arabs, soldiers from many nations stand shoulder to shoulder, resolute against Saddam Hussein's ambitions.

We can now point to five United Nations Security Council resolutions that condemn Iraq's aggression. They call for Iraq's immediate and unconditional withdrawal, the restoration of Kuwait's legitimate government, and categorically reject Iraq's cynical and self-serving attempt to annex Kuwait. Finally, the United Nations has demanded the release of all foreign nationals held hostage against their will and in contravention of international law. It is a mockery of human decency to call these people "guests." They are hostages, and the whole world knows it.

Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, a dependable ally, said it all: "We do not bargain over hostages. We will not stoop to the level of using human beings as bargaining chips ever." Of course, of course, our hearts go out to the hostages and to their families. But our policy cannot change, and it will not change. America and the world will not be blackmailed by this ruthless policy.

We're now in sight of a United Nations that performs as envisioned by its founders. We owe much to the outstanding leadership of Secretary-General Javier Perez de Cuellar. The United Nations is backing up its words with action. The Security Council has imposed mandatory economic sanctions on Iraq, designed to force Iraq to relinquish the spoils of its illegal conquest. The Security Council has also taken the decisive step of authorizing the use of all means necessary to ensure compliance with these sanctions. Together with our friends and allies, ships of the United States Navy are today patrolling Mideast waters. They've already intercepted more than 700 ships to enforce the sanctions. Three regional leaders I spoke with just yesterday told me that these sanctions are working. Iraq is feeling the heat. We continue to hope that Iraq's leaders will recalculate just what their aggression has cost them. They are cut off from world trade, unable to sell their oil. And only a tiny fraction of goods gets through.

The communique with President Gorbachev made mention of what happens when the embargo is so effective that children of Iraq literally need milk or the sick truly need medicine. Then, under strict international supervision that guarantees the proper destination, then food will be permitted.

At home, the material cost of our leadership can be steep. That's why Secretary of State Baker and Treasury Secretary Brady have met with many world leaders to underscore that the burden of this collective effort must be shared. We are prepared to do our share and more to help carry that load; we insist that others do their share as well.

The response of most of our friends and allies has been good. To help defray costs, the leaders of Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and the UAE -- the United Arab Emirates -- have pledged to provide our deployed troops with all the food and fuel they need. Generous assistance will also be provided to stalwart front-line nations, such as Turkey and Egypt. I am also heartened to report that this international response extends to the neediest victims of this conflict -- those refugees. For our part, we've contributed $28 million for relief efforts. This is but a portion of what is needed. I commend, in particular, Saudi Arabia, Japan, and several European nations who have joined us in this purely humanitarian effort.

There's an energy-related cost to be borne as well. Oil-producing nations are already replacing lost Iraqi and Kuwaiti output. More than half of what was lost has been made up. And we're getting superb cooperation. If producers, including the United States, continue steps to expand oil and gas production, we can stabilize prices and guarantee against hardship. Additionally, we and several of our allies always have the option to extract oil from our strategic petroleum reserves if conditions warrant. As I've pointed out before, conservation efforts are essential to keep our energy needs as low as possible. And we must then take advantage of our energy sources across the board: coal, natural gas, hydro, and nuclear. Our failure to do these things has made us more dependent on foreign oil than ever before. Finally, let no one even contemplate profiteering from this crisis. We will not have it.

I cannot predict just how long it will take to convince Iraq to withdraw from Kuwait. Sanctions will take time to have their full intended effect. We will continue to review all options with our allies, but let it be clear: we will not let this aggression stand.

Our interest, our involvement in the Gulf is not transitory. It predated Saddam Hussein's aggression and will survive it. Long after all our troops come home -- and we all hope it's soon, very soon -- there will be a lasting role for the United States in assisting the nations of the Persian Gulf. Our role then: to deter future aggression. Our role is to help our friends in their own self-defense. And something else: to curb the proliferation of chemical, biological, ballistic missile and, above all, nuclear technologies.

Let me also make clear that the United States has no quarrel with the Iraqi people. Our quarrel is with Iraq's dictator and with his aggression. Iraq will not be permitted to annex Kuwait. That's not a threat, that's not a boast, that's just the way it's going to be.

Our ability to function effectively as a great power abroad depends on how we conduct ourselves at home. Our economy, our Armed Forces, our energy dependence, and our cohesion all determine whether we can help our friends and stand up to our foes. For America to lead, America must remain strong and vital. Our world leadership and domestic strength are mutual and reinforcing; a woven piece, strongly bound as Old Glory. To revitalize our leadership, our leadership capacity, we must address our budget deficit -- not after election day, or next year, but now.

Higher oil prices slow our growth, and higher defense costs would only make our fiscal deficit problem worse. That deficit was already greater than it should have been -- a projected $232 billion for the coming year. It must -- it will -- be reduced.

To my friends in Congress, together we must act this very month -- before the next fiscal year begins on October 1st -- to get America's economic house in order. The Gulf situation helps us realize we are more economically vulnerable than we ever should be. Americans must never again enter any crisis, economic or military, with an excessive dependence on foreign oil and an excessive burden of Federal debt.

Most Americans are sick and tired of endless battles in the Congress and between the branches over budget matters. It is high time we pulled together and get the job done right. It's up to us to straighten this out. This job has four basic parts. First, the Congress should, this month, within a budget agreement, enact growth-oriented tax measures -- to help avoid recession in the short term and to increase savings, investment, productivity, and competitiveness for the longer term. These measures include extending incentives for research and experimentation; expanding the use of IRA's for new homeowners; establishing tax-deferred family savings accounts; creating incentives for the creation of enterprise zones and initiatives to encourage more domestic drilling; and, yes, reducing the tax rate on capital gains.

And second, the Congress should, this month, enact a prudent multiyear defense program, one that reflects not only the improvement in East-West relations but our broader responsibilities to deal with the continuing risks of outlaw action and regional conflict. Even with our obligations in the Gulf, a sound defense budget can have some reduction in real terms; and we're prepared to accept that. But to go beyond such levels, where cutting defense would threaten our vital margin of safety, is something I will never accept. The world is still dangerous. And surely, that is now clear. Stability's not secure. American interests are far reaching. Interdependence has increased. The consequences of regional instability can be global. This is no time to risk America's capacity to protect her vital interests.

And third, the Congress should, this month, enact measures to increase domestic energy production and energy conservation in order to reduce dependence on foreign oil. These measures should include my proposals to increase incentives for domestic oil and gas exploration, fuel-switching, and to accelerate the development of the Alaskan energy resources without damage to wildlife. As you know, when the oil embargo was imposed in the early 1970's, the United States imported almost 6 million barrels of oil a day. This year, before the Iraqi invasion, U.S. imports had risen to nearly 8 million barrels per day. And we'd moved in the wrong direction. And now we must act to correct that trend.

And fourth, the Congress should, this month, enact a 5-year program to reduce the projected debt and deficits by $500 billion -- that's by half a trillion dollars. And if, with the Congress, we can develop a satisfactory program by the end of the month, we can avoid the ax of sequester -- deep across-the-board cuts that would threaten our military capacity and risk substantial domestic disruption. I want to be able to tell the American people that we have truly solved the deficit problem. And for me to do that, a budget agreement must meet these tests: It must include the measures I've recommended to increase economic growth and reduce dependence on foreign oil. It must be fair. All should contribute, but the burden should not be excessive for any one group of programs or people. It must address the growth of government's hidden liabilities. It must reform the budget process and, further, it must be real.

I urge Congress to provide a comprehensive 5-year deficit reduction program to me as a complete legislative package, with measures to assure that it can be fully enforced. America is tired of phony deficit reduction or promise-now, save-later plans. It is time for a program that is credible and real. And finally, to the extent that the deficit reduction program includes new revenue measures, it must avoid any measure that would threaten economic growth or turn us back toward the days of punishing income tax rates. That is one path we should not head down again.

I have been pleased with recent progress, although it has not always seemed so smooth. But now it's time to produce. I hope we can work out a responsible plan. But with or without agreement from the budget summit, I ask both Houses of the Congress to allow a straight up-or-down vote on a complete $500-billion deficit reduction package not later than September 28. If the Congress cannot get me a budget, then Americans will have to face a tough, mandated sequester. I'm hopeful, in fact, I'm confident that the Congress will do what it should. And I can assure you that we in the executive branch will do our part.

In the final analysis, our ability to meet our responsibilities abroad depends upon political will and consensus at home. This is never easy in democracies, for we govern only with the consent of the governed. And although free people in a free society are bound to have their differences, Americans traditionally come together in times of adversity and challenge.

Once again, Americans have stepped forward to share a tearful goodbye with their families before leaving for a strange and distant shore. At this very moment, they serve together with Arabs, Europeans, Asians, and Africans in defense of principle and the dream of a new world order. That's why they sweat and toil in the sand and the heat and the sun. If they can come together under such adversity, if old adversaries like the Soviet Union and the United States can work in common cause, then surely we who are so fortunate to be in this great Chamber -- Democrats, Republicans, liberals, conservatives -- can come together to fulfill our responsibilities here. Thank you. Good night. And God bless the United States of America.

Note: The President spoke at 9:09 p.m. in the House Chamber at the Capitol. He was introduced by Thomas S. Foley, Speaker of the House of Representatives. The address was broadcast live on nationwide television and radio.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=18838
George Bush
Remarks at a Fundraising Dinner for Gubernatorial Candidate Pete Wilson in Los Angeles, California
September 18, 1990

I spoke of our four objectives. But we have another, final objective; and that is to create a new partnership of nations, a new world order -- freer from the threat of terror, stronger in the pursuit of justice, more secure in the quest for peace. The international community has already taken a giant step toward that day. Together with our friends and allies, ships of the United States Navy are patrolling the Mideast waters -- already intercepted more than 700 ships to enforce these sanctions against Iraq. And the world is simply telling Saddam Hussein, we will not give in to intimidation.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=18839
George Bush
Remarks at a Fundraising Luncheon for Gubernatorial Candidate Pete Wilson in San Francisco, California
September 19, 1990

What a dramatic legacy for our children to inherit, this stunning new partnership of nations. Ours is a generation to finally see the emergence of promising, exciting new world order which we've sought for generations. And we are witness to the first demonstration of this new partnership for peace: a united world response to Iraq's aggressive ambition.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=18851
George Bush
Remarks and a Question-and-Answer Session at a White House Briefing for Representatives of the Arab-American Community
September 24, 1990

Our objectives remain clear: Iraq must withdraw from Kuwait completely, immediately, and without condition; Kuwait's legitimate government must be restored; the security and stability of the Persian Gulf assured; and American citizens abroad must be protected. And finally, a fifth objective can emerge from these: a new world order in which the nations of the world, East and West, North and South, can prosper and live together.

The extent of world cooperation in condemning Saddam Hussein is literally unprecedented. The concept of burden-sharing is gaining acceptance with our allies and with our friends -- from Britain and France to Germany, Japan, and the Arab world -- contributing troops and supplies and economic assistance to those countries affected by the economic blockade. In fact, since Saddam Hussein's unprovoked attack on Kuwait, more than 20 countries have answered the call for help from the Gulf nations to provide defensive assistance against Iraq. And indeed, Iraq stands alone against the world community. Over and over again, Saddam Hussein has attempted to make this the Arab world against the United States. You've heard it over and over and over again. And that lie is not going to be perpetuated. It simply is not true. We are joined with many others around the world. Iraq stands alone against the world community. The United Nations Security Council has strongly condemned Saddam Hussein's actions no less than seven times. Active consideration going on for another resolution right now. United against aggression, the world community is working to resolve the crisis peacefully.

The President. This thing is so complex over there that it's pretty hard to give you a definitive answer. Out of this, though, there could well be a new world order. And part of that must be the peaceful resolution of the division of Lebanon. I've been there; I've worked there years ago. And I'm old enough -- you're too young, but I'm old enough -- no, you're not too young, but she is -- [laughter] -- no, seriously, to remember Lebanon as the peaceful crossroad. It didn't matter what was going on in the rest of the world; commerce survived, people got along one with the other, different religions and different ways of life all thriving there.

We want to help on that. I've been frustrated. One of the great frustrations of my job, as John Sununu can tell you from sitting there and listening to me wring my hands all the time, is my inability to have helped bring peace to the Lebanon. And Syria does have a key role. And I hope out of this that we can use this new world order, if you will, that might emerge if we all stay together to be catalysts for peace in the Lebanon. That's why I came back here, because you struck a chord that I really feel strongly about. And so, I would hope that that and many other things that are happening over there would result in the solution to these problems that have escaped us for so many years.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=18865
George Bush
Remarks at a Fundraising Luncheon for Gubernatorial Candidate George Voinovich in Akron, Ohio
September 26, 1990
But we have another, final objective: to create a new partnership of nations; a new world order that is free from the threat of terror, stronger in the pursuit of justice, more secure in the quest for peace.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=18879
George Bush
Remarks at the Opening Ceremony of the United Nations World Summit for Children in New York City
September 30, 1990

In recent days, the world community has acted decisively in defense of a principle: that small states shall not become souvenirs of conquest. It was just 3 weeks ago that I spoke to the American people about a new world order, a new partnership of nations -- freer from the threat of terror, stronger in the pursuit of justice, more secure in the quest for peace. Today we are holding this unprecedented world summit to work for the well-being of those who will live in and lead this new world. Their voices are still faint and unheard. So, we've come together, more than 70 strong -- heads of state, chiefs of government -- chiefs of state and heads of government -- to speak for the children of the Earth.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=18883
George Bush
Address Before the 45th Session of the United Nations General Assembly in New York, New York
October 1, 1990
The United Nations can help bring about a new day, a day when these kinds of terrible weapons and the terrible despots who would use them are both a thing of the past. It is in our hands to leave these dark machines behind, in the Dark Ages where they belong, and to press forward to cap a historic movement towards a new world order and a long era of peace.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=19064
George Bush
Remarks to the Federal Assembly in Prague, Czechoslovakia
November 17, 1990
Every new nation that embraces these common values, every new nation that joins the ranks of this commonwealth of freedom, advances us one step closer to a new world order, a world in which the use of force gives way to a shared respect for the rule of law. This new world will be incomplete without a vision that extends beyond the boundaries of Europe alone. Now that unity is within reach in Europe is no time for our vision of change to stop at the edge of this continent.

From this first crisis of the post-cold-war era comes an historic opportunity: the opportunity to draw upon the great and growing strength of the commonwealth of freedom and forge for all nations a new world order far more stable and secure than any we have known.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=19072
George Bush
Remarks and an Exchange With Reporters Following Discussions With Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher of the United Kingdom in Paris, France
November 19, 1990

The President. I don't see any irony in it whatsoever. What I see is the fact that we're able to enter into a CFE [conventional armed forces in Europe] agreement with full cooperation and support of the Soviet Union who, heretofore, has been an enormous adversary of the West. And now this reduces to practically nil the tensions that have existed. It is the farthest reaching arms control agreement in history; and it signals the new world order that is emerging, and to some degree has emerged, and that is the best hope for rolling back the brutality and the aggression of Saddam Hussein, who has nothing to do with the CFE agreement.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=19076
George Bush
Exchange With Reporters Prior to a Meeting With President Mikhail Gorbachev of the Soviet Union in Paris, France
November 19, 1990

President Bush. And inasmuch as you mentioned my name, I totally agree with that. And what's been lost today because events in other parts of the world is the significance of this meeting here in Paris, and it was historic. And President Gorbachev is correct. The fact that the Soviet Union and the United States could work together not only to achieve an arms control agreement but to start looking into the future with harmony and in cooperation is very, very promising for the new world order, for a Europe whole and free, and for peace in the world. So, somehow that's been lost today, given the understandable concerns about the Persian Gulf. But I'm glad you asked it because it is a highly significant point.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=19086
George Bush
Remarks to United States Army Troops Near Dhahran, Saudi Arabia
November 22, 1990

You know, in Eastern Europe, the economic shock wave of the Gulf threatens to disrupt the already difficult process of creating both new and democratic governments and free market economies. And while Saddam loudly professes his desire to help the most impoverished nations of the region -- the have-nots, he calls them -- his aggression is taking a terrible toll on the already hard lives of millions. And we can't hope to achieve our vision of a new world order, the safer and better world for all our kids, if the economic destiny of the world can be threatened by a vicious dictator. The world cannot, must not and, in my view, will not let this aggression stand.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=19090
George Bush
Remarks and a Question-and-Answer Session With Reporters Following Discussions With President Mohammed Hosni Mubarak in Cairo, Egypt
November 23, 1990

We are proud of this partnership which has helped us to advance the cause of peace and the fraternity among all nations, to stand for eradication of injustice and the elimination of war and violence, and to contribute to the construction of a new world order -- a world in which all nations, big or small, have a right to live in peace and dignity.

You heard President Mubarak refer to that. This, the integration of Arab countries into a CSCE process, wasn't discussed but implicit in our optimistic assessment that once Iraq is out of the way -- once the Iraq-Kuwait struggle is out of the way -- we can have a new world order. And that new world order certainly offers a much better chance for peace for the Middle East.

President Bush. This, I'm told by our leader over here on the right, not on the left this time, is the last question.

New World Order

Q. You said, President Bush, that a new world order would emerge once the Gulf crisis has been solved. How do you envisage this new world order?

President Bush. Well, I envisage it, one, where the whole -- once we're -- let me start over. Once we set back this aggression, and once it is clear that the security and the stability of the Gulf are enhanced by whatever arrangements are set into place -- once that this invading dictator gets out of Kuwait -- then I think that it's clear we're going to have an opportunity, given the diversity of this coalition, to work more closely together. And part of that -- I want to see a solution to the question of the West Bank, for example. But I think if we work cooperatively as are -- with our common sights set -- this aggressor will not succeed -- it opens up all kinds of possibilities for a new world order.

We're already seeing that world order means world. And we're beginning to see that with what happened out of the -- well, just as a result of the actions that led up to this successful CSCE meeting. I'm going down to South America, and the evolving democracies there are strengthening their economies, and we've got a program that I think will be very helpful there.

But as it relates to the Middle East, I think we've got all kinds of potentials for peace, given the fact that we've come together almost unanimously, standing up against this brutal dictator. And out of that and out of the contexts that go with that, I hope we can be catalytic in solving other problems, and I think that will lead to a new world order that has much better chance for peace for our children and our grandchildren.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=19126
George Bush
Remarks to a Joint Session of the Congress in Brasilia, Brazil
December 3, 1990
Two weeks ago in Czechoslovakia, I spoke to a people that had paid dearly for its freedom. I talked about a new commonwealth of freedom based on four key principles. This hemisphere already shares these convictions: an unshakable belief in the dignity and rights of man, the conviction that just government derives its power from the people, the belief that men and women everywhere must be free to enjoy the fruits of their labor, and four, that the rule of law must govern the conduct of nations. Every nation that joins this commonwealth of freedom advances us one step closer to a new world order. We must persist until this victory for freedom and democracy is won completely.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=19164
George Bush
Remarks and a Question-and-Answer Session With Reporters Following Discussions With Allies on the Persian Gulf Crisis
December 17, 1990

And it is so clear that -- see, the optimistic side is when we prevail we have the promise of a new world order. You have a vitalized United Nations, the peacekeeping function of which, up until now, has been rather dismal, as you look over the years; and now there's a real chance. But the chance doesn't exist if we fail. So, we've got to prevail, and we will. And I think I can confidently speak for all the countries represented here. If they felt differently, I don't expect they'd be here.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=19205
George Bush
Open Letter to College Students on the Persian Gulf Crisis
January 9, 1991

This brutality has reverberated throughout the entire world. If we do not follow the dictates of our inner moral compass and stand up for human life, then his lawlessness will threaten the peace and democracy of the emerging new world order we now see: this long dreamed-of vision we've all worked toward for so long. A year after the joyous dawn of freedom's light in eastern Europe, a dark evil has descended in another part of the world. But we have the chance -- and we have the obligation -- to stop ruthless aggression.

Terry waits thousands of miles from the White House, yet we share the same thoughts. We desperately want peace. But we know that to reward aggression would be to end the promise of our new world order. To reward aggression would be to destroy the United Nations' promise as international peacekeeper. To reward aggression would be to condone the acts of those who would desecrate the promise of human life itself. And we will do none of this. There are times in life when we confront values worth fighting for. This is one such time.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=19202
George Bush
The President's News Conference on the Persian Gulf Crisis
January 9, 1991
I listened to that `Aziz meeting, and all he tried to do is obfuscate, to confuse, to make everybody think this had to do with the West Bank, for example. And it doesn't. It has to do with the aggression against Kuwait -- the invasion of Kuwait, the brutalizing of the people in Kuwait. And it has to do with a new world order. And that world order is only going to be enhanced if this newly-activated peacekeeping function of the United Nations proves to be effective. That is the only way the new world order will be enhanced.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=19222
George Bush
Address to the Nation Announcing Allied Military Action in the Persian Gulf
January 16, 1991

This is an historic moment. We have in this past year made great progress in ending the long era of conflict and cold war. We have before us the opportunity to forge for ourselves and for future generations a new world order -- a world where the rule of law, not the law of the jungle, governs the conduct of nations. When we are successful -- and we will be -- we have a real chance at this new world order, an order in which a credible United Nations can use its peacekeeping role to fulfill the promise and vision of the U.N.'s founders.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=19229
George Bush
The President's News Conference on the Persian Gulf Conflict
January 18, 1991

Now, there are some elements that, clearly, you might say, are on the other side. And that would worry me in a sense, but it worries me for the future, not so much for the present. I think when all this is over, we want to be the healers. We want to do what we can to facilitate what I might optimistically call a new world order.

But that new world order should have a conciliatory component to it. It should say to those countries that are on the other side at this juncture -- and there aren't many of them -- look, you're part of this new world order. You're part of this. You can play an important part in seeing that the world can live at peace in the Middle East and elsewhere. So, there are some that oppose us. There are some of the more radical elements that will always oppose the West and the United States.

But there are countries involved there that may have leaned -- tilted, to use an old diplomatic expression, towards Saddam Hussein and towards Iraq that will clearly be in the forefront of this new world order. I am not going to write off Jordan. We've had a long-standing relationship with King Hussein, but he's in a very difficult position there. I have had some differences with him, but they've been respectful, but I would like to see him be more publicly understanding of what it is the United Nations is trying to do here and the United States role. We're not going to suggest that Jordan, because they've taken this position, can't continue to be a tremendously important country in this new world order.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=19245
George Bush
Remarks to the Reserve Officers Association
January 23, 1991
From the day Saddam's forces first crossed into Kuwait, it was clear that this aggression required a swift response from our nation and the world community. What was, and is, at stake is not simply our energy or economic security and the stability of a vital region but the prospects for peace in the post-cold-war era -- the promise of a new world order based upon the rule of law.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=19250
George Bush
Remarks at the Annual Convention of the National Religious Broadcasters
January 28, 1991

A just war must be a last resort. As I have often said, we did not want war. But you all know the verse from Ecclesiastes -- there is "a time for peace, a time for war." From August 2d, 1990 -- last summer, August 2d -- to January 15, 1991 -- 166 days -- we tried to resolve this conflict. Secretary of State Jim Baker made an extraordinary effort to achieve peace: more than 200 meetings with foreign dignitaries; 10 diplomatic missions; 6 congressional appearances; over 103,000 miles traveled to talk with, among others, members of the United Nations, the Arab League, and the European Community. And sadly, Saddam Hussein rejected out of hand every overture made by the United States and by other countries as well. He made this just war an inevitable war.

But with the support and prayers of so many, there can be no question in the minds of our soldiers or in the minds of our enemy about what Americans think. We know that this is a just war. And we know that, God willing, this is a war we will win. But most of all, we know that ours would not be the land of the free if it were not also the home of the brave. No one wanted war less than I did. No one is more determined to seize from battle the real peace that can offer hope, that can create a new world order.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=19253
George Bush
Address Before a Joint Session of the Congress on the State of the Union
January 29, 1991

What is at stake is more than one small country; it is a big idea: a new world order, where diverse nations are drawn together in common cause to achieve the universal aspirations of mankind -- peace and security, freedom, and the rule of law. Such is a world worthy of our struggle and worthy of our children's future.

We will succeed in the Gulf. And when we do, the world community will have sent an enduring warning to any dictator or despot, present or future, who contemplates outlaw aggression.

The world can, therefore, seize this opportunity to fulfill the long-held promise of a new world order, where brutality will go unrewarded and aggression will meet collective resistance.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=19255
George Bush
Remarks at the 50th Anniversary Observance of Franklin D. Roosevelt's Four Freedoms Speech
January 30, 1991

As we look around the world at the events of the past year, we see how these very same beliefs are bringing about the emergence of a new world order, one based on respect for the individual and for the rule of law -- a new world order that can lead to the lasting peace we all seek, where children will never have to repeat Quang's ordeal. And that's what's at stake -- a new chapter of human history.

And that's why an international coalition of 28 nations backed by the United Nations is standing up to the evil that challenges this ideal halfway around the world in the Middle East. We cannot, we must not, and we will not let that hope for a better world be threatened.

It is our commitment to the new world order that takes us to the sands and the seas of the Gulf. And we're there because we realize that each of Roosevelt's four freedoms leads us to the greatest of all human aspirations -- the freedom to live in peace.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=19267
George Bush
Remarks to Community Members at Cherry Point Marine Corps Air Station in North Carolina
February 1, 1991

No, but their courage and commitment will help punish aggression and protect our new world order from the tyranny of ruthless dictators with no concern for human life.

We're now more than 2 weeks into Operation Desert Storm. My report to you today is that we are on course, we are on schedule, and things go well. Day by day, night by night, Iraq's capacity to wage war is being systematically destroyed by U.S. and coalition military forces. And our investment, our training, and our planning are paying off. And yes, achieving our goals will require time and sacrifice, but we will prevail -- make no mistake about that. And when we do -- and when we do, we will have taught a dangerous tyrant and those few who would follow in his footsteps that there is no place for lawless aggression in this critical region and in the new world order that we seek to create.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=19268
George Bush
Remarks to Community Members at Seymour Johnson Air Force Base in Goldsboro, North Carolina
February 1, 1991
You know, we're now more than 2 weeks into Desert Storm. And I'm happy to say -- and put it this way -- we are on course and we are on schedule. And as each day passes, Iraq's war machine, thanks to many of your loved ones, is being systematically destroyed by our allied military forces. Our investment, our training, and our planning are paying off. And yes, sacrifices still lay ahead, but we will succeed. And when we do, we will have taught Saddam Hussein and all others like him that there is no place for lawless aggression in the region or in this new world order that we envision.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=19269
George Bush
Remarks to Community Members at Fort Stewart, Georgia
February 1, 1991

And when we win -- and we will -- we will have taught a dangerous dictator and any tyrant tempted to follow in his footsteps that the U.S. has a new credibility, and that what we say goes, and that there is no place for lawless aggression in the Persian Gulf and in this new world order that we seek to create. And we mean it. And he will understand that when the day is done.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=19288
George Bush
Remarks and a Question-and-Answer Session at a Meeting of the Economic Club in New York, New York
February 6, 1991

The road to real peace will be difficult -- long and tough, I'd say. But we will prevail. And when we do, we will have before us an historic opportunity. From the confluence of the Tigris and the Euphrates, where civilization began, civilized behavior can begin anew. We can build a better world and a better new world order.

So, I would like to encourage support for this new approach which empowers the people and I think will lead to far more housing.

New World Order

Q. Mr. President, you have talked several times about basing the future on a new world order. Can you give us a definition of the new world order? And if it depends on the collaboration between the Soviet Union and the United States, how do events in the Soviet Union affect this concept?

The President. Well, it doesn't depend entirely on it, but it would be greatly enhanced by a Soviet Union that goes down the line with its commitment to market reform, to private ownership of land, to a free economic system, to a system that resists and does not use force to assure order amongst the Republics, that goes farther down the road with elections and all the openness that I give President Gorbachev credit for. And as well as the openness in terms of glasnost and the reforms in terms of perestroika -- we're going to continue to support those concepts. But it was this, it was the farsighted vision of Mr. Gorbachev that enabled us to work together in the United Nations.

Now, my vision of a new world order foresees a United Nations with a revitalized peacekeeping function. I think most that follow the United Nations see the economic and social side of the United Nations as having performed well since it was founded. Most people that follow it find that the peacekeeping function for the most part has not been effective. And one of the reasons it hasn't is because of the veto in the hands of the five permanent members of the Security Council, one of them being the Soviet Union.

When I was Ambassador 20 years ago in the U.N., we hardly ever voted with the Soviet Union. Now we're with them on many, many things. So, the new world order I think foresees a revitalized peacekeeping function of the United Nations. But I cannot and I will not predict a Soviet Union going back, turning its back on reform -- perestroika -- turning its back on glasnost -- openness. I don't believe, no matter what the ferment in the Soviet Union today, that they're ever going to go back to that. And I don't think anyone there wants to go back to that.

And so it would envision, though, a much more cooperation between the United States and the Soviet Union. And on matters of the Gulf, in international matters, not bilateral, it envisions a greatly enhanced peacekeeping function of the United Nations itself.

One of the reasons we have so much support for this is that we went to the United Nations 12 times. There are 12 resolutions that speak to the Gulf, and that has mobilized world opinion. And so when we are successful in fulfilling all 12 of those resolutions, I think there's going to be new credibility for that peacekeeping function, new credibility for the United States. But we should have and should strive to have Soviet cooperation all along the way. And that's why I'm not going to back off on my efforts to try to improve relations with the Soviet Union.

Then we've left China out of the equation, and we ought not to do that. They've been through a difficult time. I took on some shots for trying to keep relations from China. I was offended as anybody else was by the human rights abuses at Tiananmen Square and spoke out on it. But I think it is in the interest of the United States to have continued relations with China. And I think it is vital to this new world order that that veto-holding member of the Security Council go along and be with us on these matters of trying to bring peace to troubled corners of the world.

Soviet Union

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=19332
George Bush
Remarks on the Observance of National Afro-American (Black) History Month
February 25, 1991

This was a war thrust upon us, not a war that we sought. But naked aggression, such as we have seen, must be resisted if it is not to become a pattern. Our success in the Gulf will bring with it not just a new opportunity for peace and stability in a critical part of the world but a chance to build a new world order based upon the principles of collective security and the rule of law.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=19342
George Bush
Remarks at a Meeting of the American Society of Association Executives
February 27, 1991

We face a new century, a new American century. Half a world away, our allied troops face a defining moment in the new world order. And they are succeeding in their battle because each and every one of them possesses a pride in their country, integrity in their cause, and courage in their heart.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=19352
George Bush
The President's News Conference on the Persian Gulf Conflict
March 1, 1991

Q. Mr. President, today you declared an end to the Vietnam syndrome and, of course, we've heard you talk a lot about the new world order. Can you tell us, do you envision a new era now of using U.S. military forces around the world for different conflicts that arise?

The President. No, I think because of what has happened, we won't have to use U.S. forces around the world. I think when we say something that is objectively correct, like don't take over a neighbor or you're going to bear some responsibility, people are going to listen because I think out of all this will be a newfound -- put it this way, a reestablished credibility for the United States of America.

So, I look at the opposite. I say that what our troops have done over there will not only enhance the peace but reduce the risk that their successors have to go into battle someplace.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=19355
George Bush
Radio Address to United States Armed Forces Stationed in the Persian Gulf Region
March 2, 1991
Yes, there remain vital and difficult tests ahead, both here and abroad, but nothing the American people can't handle. America has always accepted the challenge, paid the price, and passed the test. On this day, our spirits are high as our flag, and our future is as bright as Liberty's torch. Tomorrow we dedicate ourselves anew, as Americans always have and as Americans always will.

The first test of the new world order has been passed. The hard work of freedom awaits. Thank you. Congratulations. And God bless the United States of America.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=19364
George Bush
Address Before a Joint Session of the Congress on the Cessation of the Persian Gulf Conflict
March 6, 1991
Now, we can see a new world coming into view. A world in which there is the very real prospect of a new world order. In the words of Winston Churchill, a world order in which "the principles of justice and fair play protect the weak against the strong. . . ." A world where the United Nations, freed from cold war stalemate, is poised to fulfill the historic vision of its founders. A world in which freedom and respect for human rights find a home among all nations. The Gulf war put this new world to its first test. And my fellow Americans, we passed that test.

For the sake of our principles, for the sake of the Kuwaiti people, we stood our ground. Because the world would not look the other way, Ambassador al-Sabah, tonight Kuwait is free. And we're very happy about that.

Tonight, as our troops begin to come home, let us recognize that the hard work of freedom still calls us forward. We've learned the hard lessons of history. The victory over Iraq was not waged as "a war to end all wars." Even the new world order cannot guarantee an era of perpetual peace. But enduring peace must be our mission. Our success in the Gulf will shape not only the new world order we seek but our mission here at home.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=19398
George Bush
Remarks at the Presentation Ceremony for the Elie Wiesel Foundation Humanitarian Award and an Exchange With Reporters
March 18, 1991

Dr. Wiesel. This is the award presented to you, Mr. President. It reads: "To George Bush, for he defends the victims of dictatorship and oppression with passion, courage, and fervor. Elie Wiesel Foundation for the Humanity. March 18, 1991."

The President. It's a great honor to receive this. And it's a special honor for me to receive it from you, a man I admire greatly. Thank you, sir, very very much.

Dr. Wiesel. And this is the citation.

Dear Mr. President: At another time, in another age, another President declared that "Victory has a thousand fathers." But the most recent American triumph in the Gulf had only one father. And yet we are here today not only because you have brought about that magnificent victory. We of the Foundation have wished to honor you long before Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait, thus becoming a symbol of dictatorship and oppression.

Mr. President, 10 months ago, we invited you to accept this award because we perceived in you those qualities that the whole world now celebrates today -- your moral courage and unshakeable resolve. We knew that we shared the common belief that the world must change, not only for the United States and for the West but for all humanity.

Among the tasks our Foundation has set for itself is the unrelenting examination of the roots of hate. Why are some nations trapped in a circle of evil? Why are some peoples the continual targets for persecution? Why do tyrannies flourish in some parts of the world and not in others?

These are the vital questions of our era -- of any era. The difference is that for the first time in this tortured century we are truly on the threshold of "a new world order," to use your inspiring and memorable phrase.

Thanks to you, Mr. President, small nations feel more secure. Thanks to you, evil has been dealt a dramatic blow. Thanks to you, Mr. President, the last decade of the 20th century may well be remembered for its quest for peace rather than its obsession with violence and death.

As for Israel, Mr. President, I am sure that you are aware of the depths of our involvement with her trials and struggles. We thank you for your understanding of those trials and struggles. We thank you for the Patriots. We thank you for helping to rescue Jews from Ethiopia and the Soviet Union.

Mr. President, I, a refugee from Eastern Europe, am now a proud and loyal citizen of the United States. But spiritually I claim Israel's destiny as my own. I do not live in Israel, and yet I cannot imagine living without Israel.

We of the Foundation fervently hope that your administration will continue its resounding commitment to her security. Surely, she will remain our most steadfast ally in the Middle East. We are confident that persuasion other than pressure, trust rather than suspicion, will continue to govern your relationship with Jerusalem, whose prophetic message of peace is at the heart of its legacy.

We believe in your vision, Mr. President. We believe in the dawn of the new world order. For that reason and many others, it is a privilege for us to honor you today.

Signed Elie Wiesel.

I shall sign it for you.

The President. Please do.

Dr. Wiesel. Mr. President, you have given out so many pens, I think the time has come for you to receive one. [Laughter]

The President. I don't give out such nice ones, though. [Laughter] This is beautiful. Thank you very much.

Dr. Wiesel. I hope you will sign the peace agreement between Israel and the Arab States with this pen.

The President. Well, we're going to try. We've just had a meeting with our Secretary of State who had good visits in Israel and in other countries. So, we want to seize the moment. We want to go forward now while there is this feeling of good will and then common agreement -- common position on things that have not always been agreed. I'm thinking of the common stand in getting rid of Saddam's military offense.

So, we will try hard, sir. But I am very honored with this and grateful to you. Receiving it from this one is very special to me, I'll tell you. Thank you, sir, very much. Thank you.

Middle East Peace Process

Q. Dr. Wiesel, what precisely would you like to see the President do to achieve that kind of peace in the Middle East? What do you think is necessary?

Dr. Wiesel. I think the President should be himself, a man who listens. I have known the President for some years -- when he was still Vice President -- and he was always listening. I think the President knows how to listen and knows how to make people talk. What I would like the President to do, of course, is to listen to Israel's fears, just as Israel should listen to the President's hopes.

Q. Mr. President, can you share anything with us about your talk with Secretary Baker?

The President. No. We just met for 45 minutes, and then we'll be meeting again, either today or tomorrow. But I responded to a question down either in Bermuda or in Martinique, where I said that there is reason to be hopeful. And I think he found not just in Israel but in other capitals a recognition of the fact that we ought to try to go forward. And I think the climate for fulfilling some of these hopes is probably better than it's ever been. And I'm talking about on all sides out there. So, we will be working very hard. But there's no -- I don't want to add any specifics. He has some specific ideas that we need to talk about here.

But I found the Secretary of State, in spite of an arduous trip, hopeful that we can move forward. And we're certainly going to try. We are not going to miss this opportunity.

Q. What's the next step, Mr. President?

The President. Well, there are a lot of next steps. Of course, one of them relates -- there's three areas, as you know: the Lebanon, the Israel question with Palestine and all of that, and then, obviously, the Gulf. And so, the next steps -- the earlier, practical steps have to be in getting a cease-fire in the Gulf area. But we will go forward, trying our best to do that, using the United Nations structure, inasmuch as we're operating under the U.N. resolutions there. That is not the case, necessarily, say, in the Lebanon.

I don't think the American people ought to think that you can wave a wand and solve all three of these very difficult problems at once. But all I know is, I think the United States is in a stronger position, a more credible position to be the most important catalyst for peace, and that has been reinforced by what Secretary Baker has told me -- what he's found in Moscow, what he's found in the Arab countries, what he's found in Israel.

Q. He spoke during his trip of a window of opportunity here to try to find elements of peace. Is that window narrow? Does that window close after a certain length of time here just because, in part, of some of the frustrations and failures of the past in that region?

The President. Well, I think the longer one waits to take any initiatives, the danger is things revert back to a status quo. And I think that will be unacceptable. And so we're working on these two tracks as it relates to the State of Israel, trying to get peace going between countries that had been at war and then try to have suggestions for the solution of the Palestinian question that has avoided us for a long, long time -- avoided the countries and various individuals in the area.

So, we're going to try. But I'm not putting any timeframe on this, Norm [Norm Sandler, United Press International]. All I'm saying is that while people are thinking peace and while it is clear that a major threat has been diminished, we ought to try to move forward now. And I like very much the -- I would say, the endorsement by Dr. Wiesel of this concept of a new world order, because encompassed in that are countries living at peace that have heretofore been at war. And that's what we're going to be trying to -- --

Q. Are you encouraged by the -- --

Q. -- -- the talks with Syria?

The President. Well, I think that there's some good talks there. We still have differences, as everyone knows. But let's find common ground. Let's see if we can take these historic enmities and bring them -- eliminate them. And that's what we're going to try to do. But nobody is suggesting it's easy, including the Secretary of State, who tried very hard.

Q. What is the state of play, Mr. President, now on a permanent cease-fire? Are you going to the U.N. this week?

The President. Well, there will be some U.N. action this week, I think, or certainly U.N. consultation is already beginning. But we've got to work out between the coalition partners, get common ground between the coalition partners. But broadly speaking, people know what is required. I would like to see us reduce the flow of weapons into the area, which is an important -- could be an important part of this. But there are a lot of other difficult points.

Iraq must pay reparations or pay damages. The more one looks at the environmental terrorism that they embraced, that they brought about, the more the world understands that they have got to do something about that. So how do you do it? Well, they are potentially a wealthy country. The trouble is they've taken all that wealth and spread it into weapons and then into aggression. And the aggression has been checked, but now we've got to see that they use their resources for helping their own people. And that's a little complicated, given the three areas of contest right now -- almost combat right now -- the south, up to the north, and then some in Baghdad itself.

So anyway, all of these areas have to be dealt with. And we're trying. We're beginning to go to work on all of them.

Q. Mr. President, do you think Arab countries are willing to talk to Israel, and is there a genuine reciprocal view?

The President. Well, Secretary Baker had good discussions with Prime Minister Shamir on that. He had good discussions with the heads of many other governments on that. Talked to the Soviets about that, who still have an interest in the Middle East. And so, we'll just wait and see how all that develops. But I would hope that that would prove to be the case. Israel has restated its willingness to talk, and I think that's a very great thing.

Thank you all.

Q. When will you go to the Middle East?

The President. No plans yet. It's not set.

George H. W. Bush elnök szerint Kuvait megszállása Irak által egy egyedülálló, rendkívüli, ritka lehetőség volt ("We stand today at a unique and extraordinary moment. The crisis in the Persian Gulf, as grave as it is, also offers a rare opportunity to move toward an historic period of cooperation.") a történelmi összefogásra az "Új Világrend" kialakítása céljából, ami úgymond az előző száz generáció által áhított békés, igazságos, terrormentes szabad világ záloga ("Out of these troubled times, our fifth objective —a new world order— can emerge: a new era— freer from the threat of terror, stronger in the pursuit of justice, and more secure in the quest for peace. An era in which the nations of the world, East and West, North and South, can prosper and live in harmony. A hundred generations have searched for this elusive path to peace, while a thousand wars raged across the span of human endeavor.".

Magasztos gondolatok, ha hátsószándéktól lettek volna mentesek, hiszen valóban minden jóérzésű ember egy szebb, boldogabb, békésebb és igazságosabb közös jövőre vágyakozik. Az emberiség egyáltalán nem lehet büszke a történelmére, amit háborúk, rabszolgaság, népirtások, fajgyűlölet, sok esetben vallási indíttatású nacionalizmusok, az emberi szabadságjogok semmibevétele, a többség elnyomása, kiszipolyozása, kihasználása jellemzett...

A republikánus George H. W. Bush 1976 - 1977-ig a CIA-nak, 1977 - 1979-ig pedig a Council on Foreign Relations-nak (CFR) volt az igazgatója, magánszemélyként pedig texasi olajmágnás...

Ahhoz, hogy az Irak elleni háborúhoz hozzájáruljon az Egyesült Államok kongresszusa, egy alaptalan színjátékot rendeztek a Capitoliumban a parlamenti képviselők számára.
A Magyarországról származott Tom Lantos (1928 - 2008) közbenjárására egy 15 éves, "Nayirah" nevű leányzó kapott lehetőséget a kongresszus előtt beszámolni az iraki "kegyetlenségekről". A nevét nem hozták úgymond azért nyilvánosságra, hogy ezzel megkíméljék a Kuvaitban maradt hozzátartozóit az iraki bosszútól...
A lány zokogva adta elő, hogy egy kuvaiti városnak a kórházában (al-Adan Hospital) ápolónőként tevékenykedett az iraki hadsereg bevonulásakor. Szemtanúja volt az elmondása szerint annak a brutális esetnek, amikor iraki katonák 312 koraszülött csecsmő inkubátorait eltulajdonították, a benne lévő kuvaiti kisdedeket pedig kidobálták a hideg földre, ahol hagyták meghalni őket...

Ezt a "történetet" 1990.11.27-én megismételtették ezzel a lánnyal az ENSZ Biztonsági Tanácsa előtt is, amit egy Dr. Behbehani nevű "sebész" is tanúsított...

Vajon kit ne háborítana fel az ilyen fajta kegyetlenség?

Mint azonban utólagosan kiderült, a leányzó a kuvaiti nagykövet lánya volt, és az általa előadott szörnyű "történetnek" pedig nem volt semmi reális alapja... Azt a célt viszont elérték ezzel az érdekeltek, hogy a kongresszus tagjait, a szenátorokat, a közvéleményt, a Biztonsági Tanácsot félre sikerült vezetniük, és ez által megvalósulhatott az az Irak elleni kíméletlen háború, amire Bush elnök szerint úgymond az Új Világrend létrehozásához volt szükséges.

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nijirah_al-Sabah
Die Brutkastenlüge bezeichnet die Behauptung, irakische Soldaten hätten bei der Invasion Kuwaits im Jahr 1990 kuwaitische Säuglinge in einem Krankenhaus in Kuwait-Stadt getötet. Die Behauptung stellte sich später als haltlos heraus.

Eine damals fünfzehnjährige Kuwaiterin erklärte vor dem Menschenrechtsausschuss des US-Kongresses unter Tränen, sie habe freiwillige Arbeit im Al-Adnan-Krankenhaus in Kuwait-Stadt geleistet und sagte wörtlich: „Ich habe gesehen, wie die irakischen Soldaten mit Gewehren in das Krankenhaus kamen …, die Säuglinge aus den Brutkästen nahmen, die Brutkästen mitnahmen und die Kinder auf dem kalten Boden liegen ließen, wo sie starben.“[1] Erst später stellte sich heraus, dass die Jugendliche die Tochter eines kuwaitischen Diplomaten war.

Präsident George H. W. Bush erwähnte deren Geschichte in den nächsten fünf Wochen nicht weniger als sechs Mal.

http://www.reutlinger-friedensgruppe.de ... uwe_wo.htm
Berichte über irakische Grausamkeiten
Die PR-Strategen kreierten Nayirah, ein 15jähriges kuwaitische Mädchen, das in einem Krankenhaus in Kuwait City gearbeitet haben soll. Mit stockender Stimme berichtete sie vor laufender Kamera, wie irakische Soldaten Babys aus den Brutkästen rissen, die Inkubatoren mitnahmen und die Säuglinge auf dem kalten Klinikboden sterben ließen. Die Welt war entsetzt über so viel Grausamkeit der Iraker. Die Medien liefen heiß und Politiker empörten sich. US-Präsident Bush zitierte die Aussage das Mädchens.

Aussage war schlicht erfunden
Erst später stellte sich heraus, daß die Aussage von Nayirah nichts anderes als eine blanke Lüge war. Hinzu kam noch, daß die angeblichen Krankenhauspraktikantin die Tochter von Scheich Saud Nasir al-Sabah war, dem ehemaligen kuwaitschen Botschafter in den USA.


http://www.ub.uni-konstanz.de/kops/voll ... yc30c.html (már nem lehet elérni)
http://kops.ub.uni-konstanz.de/bitstrea ... sequence=1
Zuerst erschienen in: Manipulierte Wirklichkeiten. Medienpsychologische Untersuchungen der bundesdeutschen Presseberichterstattung im Golfkrieg.
Münster: LIT-Verlag, 1994) S. 3-27
(S. 4-5) 1. Informationsverweigerung und Desinformation

In der Golfkriese begann die Desinformationskampagne nicht erst mit Inkrafttreten der Zensurbestimmungen Mitte Januar 1991.
Zensurbestimmungen Mitte Januar 1991 ein. Die US-Regierung hat bereits in Vorbereitung auf den Krieg maßgebliche Informationen durch Zensur und Propaganda entstellt. Z.B. indem sie die Legende von der riesigen Militärmacht des Irak ausstreute, der über eine Million schlachterprobter Soldaten verfüge und damit den ganzen Nahen Osten bedrohe. Während der alliierten Landoffensive zeigte sich dann, daß die angebliche irakische Supermacht alles andere war als eine mächtige Kriegsmaschine (vgl. Ege, 1992, S. 1367).

Auch fand sich schon lange im Vorfeld des Krieges in der Berichterstattung der Massenmedien eine weitestgehende Vorenthaltung aller Sachinformationen über Konfliktursachen und Konfliktgenese, die zur Besetzung Kuwaits durch den Irak geführt hatten. Nur so konnte das Bild entstehen: "Der Krieg beginnt - gleichsam aus heiterem Himmel - durch den 'Überfall' eines 'Irren' auf ein Nachbarland".
Andere Informationen, die von den meisten Medien bisher - d.h. solange Saddam Hussein als Verbündeter des Westens gelten konnte - "nicht dramatisiert" wurden, wie Waffenlieferungen an den Irak oder die irakischen Giftgaseinsätze gegen die kurdische Bevölkerung nach Ende des iran-irakischen Krieges wurden für die Medien jetzt zum Thema. So entstand das Bild: "Der Irre besitzt Massenvernichtungswaffen und ist bereit, diese auch einzusetzen". Und die logische Folgerung: "Er muß gestoppt werden, bevor die ganze Welt in Flammen steht".
Zudem war der Golfkrieg der erste Krieg, in dem eine Public Relations-Firma in den USA für teures Geld Propaganda für einen ausländischen Klienten machte, um die Kriegsbereitschaft der Amerikaner zu schüren. Die kuwaitische Regierung zahlte der Public Relations-Firma Hill & Knowlton mehr als 10 Mio. US$, um Informationen über irakische Grausamkeiten in Kuwait fernsehgerecht aufzubereiten. Das allermeiste, was die US-Öffentlichkeit vor Beginn des Luftkrieges aus Kuwait zu sehen bekam, stammte von Hill & Knowlton. Mit den Tatsachen hatte es oft wenig zu tun. So wurde z.B. das Video einer friedlichen Demonstration in Kuwait so geschnitten, daß es aussah, als hätten irakische Soldaten in die Menge geschossen.2
Ihren spekulärsten Erfolg hatte die Firma, als eine fünfzehnjährige Kuwaiterin unter Tränen vor einem Kongreßausschuß aussagte, sie habe gesehen, wie irakische Soldaten fünfzehn Babies aus Brutkästen gerissen hätten. Die Brutkastengeschichte hatte enorme Wirkung. Mehrere Senatoren nannten sie als Beweggrund ihrer Stimmabgabe für eine Kriegsresolution.
Wie John MacArthur in der New York Times vom 6.1.1992 aufdeckte, war die fünfzehnjährige Zeugin, Nayirah, deren Nachnahme angeblich nicht bekanntgegeben worden war, "um ihre Familie zu schützen", in Wahrheit die Tochter des kuwaitischen Botschafters in den USA und ihre Geschichte so nicht richtig.3
Selbst ein Bericht der internationalen Detektei Kroll Associates, die 1992 von der kuwaitischen Regierung angeheuert wurde, um Beweise für Nayirahs Geschichte zu finden, nachdem ihre Glaubwürdigkeit von mehreren Journalisten in Frage gestellt worden war, bestätigte, daß Nayirah ganz einfach nicht gesehen hatte, wofür sie sich als Augenzeugin ausgab, und die Menschenrechtsorganisation "Middle East Watch" hat Nayirahs Geschichte anhand von Interviews mit kuwaitischen Ärzten und Friedhofswärtern weitgehend widerlegt.4

2 - Morgan Strong, Portions of the Gulf War were brought to you by ... the folks at Hill and Knowlton, in TV Guide vom 22.2.1992, zit.n. Ege (1992, S.1370).
3- Vgl. hierzu auch Werth (1992), sowie MacArthur (1993), der eine sehr ausführliche Schilderung der Vorfälle gibt.
4 - Middle East Watch, Kuwait´s ´Stolen´ Incubators: The Widespread Repercussions of a Murky Incident", New York, 2.6.1992, zit.n. Ege (1992, S.1371).

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nijirah_al-Sabah (a korábbi magyarázat időközben megváltozott)
Nijirah al-Sabah ist eine Kuwaiterin, die sich am 10. Oktober 1990 als 15-jähriges Mädchen vor dem US-Kongress unter dem Namen Nayirah über angebliche Gräuel während der irakischen Kuwait-Invasion äußerte. Sie sagte, sie habe freiwillige Arbeit im Al-Adnan-Krankenhaus in Kuwait-Stadt geleistet und dabei beobachtet, wie irakische Soldaten in der Entbindungsstation kuwaitische Babys aus ihren Brutkästen gerissen und sie zu Boden geworfen hätten. Die Brutkästen hätten sie mitgenommen.

Erst später stellte sich heraus, dass es sich bei dem Mädchen um die Tochter des kuwaitischen Botschafters in den USA, Saud Nasir al-Sabah, handelte. Die Organisation Citizens for a Free Kuwait hatte die Firma Hill & Knowlton beauftragt, Nayirahs Geschichte (die von Lauri Fitz-Pegado erfunden worden war) publik zu machen. Zwei Krankenschwestern der betreffenden Entbindungsstation erklärten später, dass Nayirah nicht dort gearbeitet habe und die von ihr beschriebenen Vorfälle niemals stattgefunden hätten.

Nayirahs erfundene Geschichte hatte eine durchschlagende Wirkung auf die Politik der USA gegenüber dem Irak. Präsident George H. W. Bush erwähnte Nayirahs Geschichte in den nächsten fünf Wochen nicht weniger als sechs Mal und sechs Kongressabgeordnete waren der Meinung, dass diese Vorfälle als Kriegsgrund ausreichen würden. Der US-Senat stimmte schließlich mit 52 zu 47 Stimmen für einen Krieg gegen den Irak, was 1991 zum Zweiten Golfkrieg führte. Hill & Knowlton erhielt für diese Publikmachung später 14 Millionen Dollar von der US-Regierung.

Az új változat:

Brutkastenlüge
Die Brutkastenlüge bezeichnet die Behauptung, irakische Soldaten hätten bei der Invasion Kuwaits im Jahr 1990 kuwaitische Säuglinge in einem Krankenhaus in Kuwait-Stadt getötet. Die Behauptung stellte sich später als haltlos heraus.

Aussage
Eine damals fünfzehnjährige Kuwaiterin erklärte vor dem Menschenrechtsausschuss des US-Kongresses unter Tränen, sie habe freiwillige Arbeit im Al-Adnan-Krankenhaus in Kuwait-Stadt geleistet und sagte wörtlich: „Ich habe gesehen, wie die irakischen Soldaten mit Gewehren in das Krankenhaus kamen …, die Säuglinge aus den Brutkästen nahmen, die Brutkästen mitnahmen und die Kinder auf dem kalten Boden liegen ließen, wo sie starben.“[1] Erst später stellte sich heraus, dass die Jugendliche die Tochter eines kuwaitischen Diplomaten war.

Die Organisation Citizens for a Free Kuwait hatte die PR-Agentur Hill & Knowlton für 10 Millionen US-Dollar beauftragt, die erfundene Geschichte des Mädchens publik zu machen.[2] Zwei Krankenschwestern der betreffenden Entbindungsstation erklärten später, dass die Jugendliche nicht dort gearbeitet habe und die von ihr beschriebenen Vorfälle niemals stattgefunden hätten.

Wirkung
Die Darstellung der Jugendlichen hatte eine durchschlagende Wirkung auf die Politik der USA gegenüber dem Irak. Präsident George H. W. Bush erwähnte deren Geschichte in den nächsten fünf Wochen nicht weniger als sechs Mal. Aber auch amnesty international veröffentlichte am 19. Dezember 1990, über drei Monate nach dem Auftritt des Mädchens, einen 84-seitigen Bericht über Menschenrechtsverletzungen in Kuwait, welche die Brutkästen-Behauptung enthielt. Sie wurde auch noch am 8. Januar 1991 von einem führenden Mitarbeiter von amnesty international vor dem Komitee für auswärtige Angelegenheiten wiederholt. Der US-Senat stimmte schließlich am 12. Januar 1991 mit 52 zu 47 Stimmen für einen Krieg gegen den Irak, was 1991 zum Zweiten Golfkrieg führte. Das Repräsentantenhaus stimmte mit 250 zu 183 Stimmen für den Krieg.

http://www.heise.de/tp/artikel/14/14271/1.html
26.02.2003
Am Anfang stand die Lüge
Die "Brutkasten-Story"

Der US-Kabelsender HBO, wie CNN im Besitz des Medienkonzerns Time Warner Entertainment Company, produzierte "Live from Baghdad" nach eigenen Angaben als Doku-Drama (= Spielfilm auf der Basis wahrer Begebenheiten) über die CNN-Golfkriegsberichterstattung 1991. Als die, laut HBO-Pressetext, "echte Hintergrund-Story" am 4. Dezember 2002 in den USA erstmals ausgestrahlt wurde, schlug die amerikanische Medienorganisation Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR) jedoch angesichts der dargestellten "Hintergründe" Alarm[1]. "Live from Baghdad" präsentiert die im Vorfeld des Golfkrieges von der Public Relations-Firma Hill & Knowlton (H&K) erwiesenermaßen erfundene und inszenierte "Brutkasten-Story" als reales Ereignis, obwohl schon seit elf Jahren bekannt ist, dass es sich dabei um eine Propagandalüge handelt.

Kurz vor dem ersten Jahrestag des Golfkriegsbeginns, am 6. Januar 1992, hatte der US-amerikanische Publizist und Herausgeber des hochangesehenen Harper's Magazine, John MacArthur, in seinem New York Times-Artikel "Remember Nayirah, Witness for Kuwait?"[2] die Lügengeschichte entlarvt, das WDR-Magazin Monitor berichtete am 29.3.1992 von MacArthur's Enthüllungen und lieferte weitere Fakten nach.

Kép
"Nayirah" vor dem Kongressausschuss

Zum Hintergrund: Im Spätsommer 1990 hatte die in den USA operierende kuwaitische Lobbyorganisation "Citizens for a free Kuwait" die weltweit größte PR-Agentur Hill & Knowlton für eine Kampagne engagiert, die im Vorfeld des Waffenganges gegen den Irak 1990/91 nicht nur zweifelnde Politiker, sondern insbesondere auch die Bevölkerungen in den USA und den anderen Staaten der "Anti-Hussein-Koalition" von der Notwendigkeit eines Waffenganges am Golf überzeugen sollte. H&K kassierte für ihre Bemühungen allein in den ersten 90 Tagen ab Anfang August 1990 mehr als 5,5 Millionen. und insgesamt 10,8 Millionen US-Dollar.[3]

Das wohl international Aufsehen erregendste Element der H&K-Kampagne war die Verbreitung der Gräuelgeschichte, plündernde Soldaten der irakischen Besatzungsmacht hätten in Kuwait Brutkästen aus Krankenhäusern gestohlen und insgesamt über 300 Frühgeborene auf dem Fußboden zurückgelassen, wo sie starben. In einem Hearing vor dem Menschenrechtsausschuss des US-Kongresses am 19. Oktober 1990 berichtete ein 15-jähriges Mädchen namens "Nayirah", die man als geflüchtete kuwaitische Schwesternhelferin und Augenzeugin vorstellte, sie selbst habe im al-Adan Hospital in Kuwait City beobachtet, wie irakische Soldaten 15 Babies aus Brutkästen nahmen und "auf dem Steinboden sterben ließen".

Die Vorsitzenden des Ausschusses, Tom Lantos, Demokratische Partei, und John Edward Porter, Republikaner, baten während des Hearings um Verständnis dafür, dass der Ausschuss Nayirahs wahre Identität verheimlichen müsse, um deren Familie in Kuwait vor Repressionen zu schützen. John MacArthur berichtete später:

"Kein Teilnehmer des Hearings, auch kein Reporter, fragte. 'Nayirah, das ist eine schreckliche Geschichte und ich bin den Tränen nahe. Aber was hast Du getan? ... Hast Du Hilfe gerufen? Was ist dann geschehen?' Die elementarsten Fragen die ein Reporter stellen sollte, wurden nicht gestellt. Nayirah war ein fantastischer Propagandaerfolg. Hill & Knowlton produzierten einen brillianten Nachrichtenfilm über das Hearing und verteilten ihn weltweit. Millionen Menschen sahen das Video in den NBC Nightly News. ... Das war der Beginn, die Kampagne 'bekam Beine', wie wir im Public Relations- und Nachrichtengeschäft sagen."[4]

Am 27. November 1990 wiederholte Nayirah ihre Schilderungen sogar vor dem UN-Sicherheitsrat, gemeinsam mit einem weiteren Augenzeugen, der als Chirurg Dr. Behbehani vorgestellte wurde und nach eigenen Angaben einem Begräbnis von 40 Babys beigewohnt hatte, die auf die gleiche Weise ermordet worden waren.

Der Coup gelang. Die Horrorstory beeinflusste die Debatte über eine militärische Intervention in den nächsten Monaten nachhaltig und sogar Amnesty International übernahm die Geschichte und prangerte die Verbrechen der irakischen Besatzungsarmee in Kuwait an. Nach John MacArthur hatte keine der vielen Anschuldigungen gegen Saddam Hussein mehr Einfluss auf die öffentliche Meinung in den USA als die von den ermordeten Babys in Kuwait City.[5]

Umfragen hätten gezeigt, dass 50 Prozent der Bevölkerung weitere Sanktionen, 50 Prozent ein militärisches Eingreifen forderten. Als der US-Senat am 12. Januar mit einer äußerst knappen Mehrheit die Kriegsresolution der Bush-Administration befürwortete, gaben sechs Senatoren an, die Brutkasten-Geschichte sei der ausschlaggebende Grund für ihre Entscheidung gewesen, einem Krieg zuzustimmen.."[6]

Die Brutkasten-Story hielt sich nicht nur bis Ende des Krieges in den Massenmedien, sondern wurden auch von den Regierungen der am Krieg beteiligten "Anti-Hussein-Koalition" immer wieder zur innenpolitischen Legitimation des Waffengangs gegen den Irak vorgebracht. Der ABC-Reporter John Marti war der erste Journalist, der nach der Befreiung Kuwaits den Behauptungen über die Ermordung kuwaitischer Babys nachging. Er interviewte Krankenhausärzte, die während der irakischen Besetzung im Land geblieben waren und niemand von ihnen konnte Nayirahs und Dr. Behbehanis Behauptungen bestätigen. Auch verschiedene Menschenrechtsgruppen forschten nach und konnten ebenfalls keine Hinweise darauf finden, dass die "Brutkasten-Story" einen realen Hintergrund hatte. Amnesty International distanzierte sich von der Geschichte.

Wie sich später herausstellte, war Dr. Behbehani ein Zahnarzt und kein Chirurg, der nach dem Krieg offen zugab, dass er gelogen hatte.[7] Bei Nayirah, das fand John MacArthur heraus, handelte es sich in Wirklichkeit um die Tochter des kuwaitischen Botschafters in den USA, Saud Nasir al-Sabah. Wo sie sich im August und September 1990 aufgehalten hatte, konnte MacArthur damals nicht ermitteln. Die kuwaitische Botschaft reagierte auf seine Nachfragen schroff; sie verweigerte jegliche Stellungnahme und schirmte Nayirah vor der Presse ab.

MacArthurs Recherchen über die Hintergründe der "Brutkasten-Lüge" förderten nicht nur zutage, dass der Vizepräsident von Hill & Knowlton, Gary Hymel, direkt an der Vorbereitung des Kongress-Hearings mit Nayirah im Oktober 1990 beteiligt war, sondern auch, dass die beiden Kongressabgeordneten Tom Lantos und John Edward Porter, die Nayirah vor den Menschenrechtsausschuss des US-Kongresses geladen hatten, enge Verbindungen zu H&K und ihrem Auftraggeber "Citizens for a Free Kuwait" pflegten: Die Spendenorganisation des Menschenrechtsausschusses, die Human Rights Foundation, die Lantos und Porter 1985 selbst gegründet hatten, residierte zu einem verminderten Mietpreis im H&K-Stammhaus und die "Citizens for a Free Kuwait" hatten der Stiftung nach dem irakischen Einmarsch in Kuwait 50.000 US-Dollar gespendet.

http://www.evangelisch.de/themen/medien ... -opfer7481
27. November 2009
Krieg: Die Wahrheit ist das erste Opfer
Kurz vor Ausbruch des Golfkriegs 1990 sorgte die Geschichte der kuwaitischen Krankenschwester Nayirah weltweit für Entsetzen. Unter Tränen berichtete sie vor dem amerikanischen Kongress-Ausschuss für Menschenrechte von den Greueltaten irakischer Soldaten in Kuwait. Babys seien aus ihren Brutkästen gerissen und auf den Boden geworfen worden. Die "Brutkasten-Geschichte" trug erheblich zur Rechtfertigung der damaligen Golfkriegspolitik bei.

Heute ist klar, dass diese Brustkasten-Geschichte eine Brutkasten-Lüge war. Die PR-Strategen der Firma Hill und Knowlton hatten sich den Propaganda-Coup ausgedacht und dafür zehn Millionen Dollar von der kuwaitischen Regierung erhalten. Erst als der Krieg vorbei war, entpuppte sich Nayirah als Tochter des kuwaitischen Botschafters in Washington. Gut in Erinnerung sind der Öffentlichkeit auch noch die angeblichen Bilder irakischer Massenvernichtungswaffen, die die USA vor dem Irakkrieg 2003 der Weltöffentlichkeit präsentierten - und die sich ebenfalls als Fälschungen erwiesen.

http://www.berlinonline.de/berliner-zei ... dien/0006/ (már nem lehet elérni)
http://www.berliner-zeitung.de/berliner ... index.html (már nem lehet elérni)
Schlacht der Lügen
Wie Politiker, Militärs und PR-Strategen in Kriegszeiten gezielt Desinformationen verbreiten
21.03.2003
Einen der größten Coups aber landete die US-Regierung mit der Anhörung einer kuwaitischen Zeugin, die den irakischen Einmarsch angeblich miterlebte. Irakische Soldaten hätten Frühgeborene aus den Inkubatoren im Krankenhaus auf den Boden geworfen, erzählte sie schluchzend dem US-Kongress. Die "Brutkasten-Story" ging um die Welt: Zuerst als Beleg für die Brutalität der irakischen Soldaten und als Anlass, die Befreiungsaktion zu beginnen. Dann machte die Aussage als plumpe Fälschung Schlagzeilen. Die Aktion war von der Publicrelationsfirma Hill and Knowlton inszeniert worden, bei der Zeugin handelte es sich um die Tochter des kuwaitischen Botschafters in den USA. Die irakischen Truppen hatten Gräuel in Kuwait verübt, doch die für die öffentliche Meinung so entscheidende Baby-Geschichte stellte sich 1992 als eine Erfindung heraus.

http://books.google.de/
Christian Rell: Amerika in der deutschen Presse- Eine Inhaltsanalyse von Interpretationshilfen in der deutschen Tageszeitung taz (2007) ISBN 3638712389, 9783638712385
(S. 62) Doening, Martina und Rennefanz, SaSabine, Schlacht der Lügen. Wie Politiker, Millitärs und PR-Strategen in Kriegszeiten gezielt Desinformationen verbreiten, aus der Berliner Zeitung vom 21.3.2003, S. 14.


Erről az intézményesített félrevezetésről itt látható az eredeti videófelvétel:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LmfVs3WaE9Y
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vu8CCJTJ ... re=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yJzQcsSV ... re=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3QlEUNw8 ... re=related

Annyit még feltétlenül meg kell jegyezni, hogy mielőtt az iraki hadsereg bevonult Kuvaitba (1990.08.02.), az Egyesült Államok nagykövetasszonya, April Glaspie 1990.07.26-án találkozott az iraki elnökkel, és félreinformálta az USA várható magatartásáról egy Kuvait ellen irányuló támadás esetére:

http://www.hintergrund.de/20090804453/g ... addam.html
4. August 2009
Das Komplott der CIA mit Kuweit: Was sagte eigentlich April Glaspie zu Saddam?

Kép

Der 25. Juli war ein denkwürdiger Tag – es war der 19. Jahrestag des berüchtigten Treffens zwischen April Glaspie, der ehemaligen US-Botschafterin in Irak, und Saddam Hussein im Jahr 1990.* Leider ist dieses Ereignis praktisch aus der Geschichte der US-Irak-Beziehungen eliminiert worden. Nach dem Waffenstillstandsabkommen zwischen den USA und Irak im Februar 1991 gab es ein wenig Beachtung in den Medien, die aber schnell wieder verschwand.

Am Ende des irakisch-iranischen Krieges war die Wirtschaft Iraks erheblich geschwächt. Die Ereignisse, die zu „Desert Storm“ (US-Name für den 1. gegen Irak geführten Krieg, .d.Ü.) führten, begannen sich herauszukristallisieren.

Während des Krieges lieh Kuweit Gelder an Irak. Das Geld wurde sowohl zur Verteidigung Kuweits als auch Iraks verwendet, und die irakische Regierung hatte nicht erwartet, nach dem Ende der Feindseligkeiten unter Druck gesetzt zu werden, um die Darlehen sofort zurückzuzahlen, besonders deshalb, weil ein großer Teil des Geldes benutzt wurde, Iran an einer Invasion Kuweits zu hindern.

Bald nach dem Waffenstillstand verlangte Kuweit die Rückzahlung. Saddam Hussein war schockiert, das Kuweit einen solchen Druck ausübte nach all den Opfern, die Irak gebracht hatte. Als Irak versuchte, die Angelegenheit der Rückzahlung mit Kuweit zu diskutieren, wurden die Kuweitis noch unwilliger, eine Erleichterung bei der Schuldenrückzahlung zuzugestehen. Die Iraker wussten bereits, dass die CIA und Kuweit Maßnahmen getroffen hatten, um die irakische Wirtschaft weiter zu unterminieren, aber sie waren sich nicht der Ernsthaftigkeit und der Fortschritte dieser Pläne bewusst.

Kuweit begann entgegen den Wünschen seiner Erdöl-produzierenden Partner in der OPEC mehr Öl als seine erlaubte Quote zu produzieren, wodurch es den Erdölpreis auf dem Weltmarkt senkte. Jedes Mal, wenn Kuweits Aktionen eine Verminderung des Ölpreises erzwangen, verlor Irak Millionen, wenn nicht Milliarden Dollar, was die Wirtschaft zusätzlich unterhöhlte.

Trotz dieser unheilvollen Vorhersage maß die arabische Welt ihr keine große Bedeutung zu. Die meisten Länder der Region konnten sich keine US-Präsenz vorstellen, die ihnen eine US-Politik diktieren würde. Die Ereignisse seit 1990 haben zum Kummer der regionalen arabischen Länder bewiesen, dass Saddam Husseins Aussage korrekt war. Heute sind Länder wie Qatar und Kuweit praktisch US-Besitzungen.

Kuweit begann entgegen den Wünschen seiner Erdöl-produzierenden Partner in der OPEC mehr Öl als seine erlaubte Quote zu produzieren, wodurch es den Erdölpreis auf dem Weltmarkt senkte. Jedes Mal, wenn Kuweits Aktionen eine Verminderung des Ölpreises erzwangen, verlor Irak Millionen, wenn nicht Milliarden Dollar, was die Wirtschaft zusätzlich unterhöhlte.

Die Situation wurde immer angespannter, und Saddam Hussein bat um ein Treffen mit April Glaspie, der US-Botschafterin in Irak. Sie trafen sich am 25. Juli 1990, und Saddam erklärte ihr die missliche Lage seines Landes. Er diskutierte Kuweits Bruch der OPEC-Abkommen und den dringenden Geldbedarf seines Landes, um die Infrastruktur wiederherzustellen, die in dem 8-jährigen Iran-Irak-Krieg geschädigt worden war.

Daraufhin versicherte Glaspie Saddam, dass die USA auf Iraks Seite stünden und die USA die Wünsche Iraks zum Wiederaufbau verstünden. Sie erklärte:

”Ich glaube, dass ich verstehe. Ich habe hier jahrelang gelebt. Ich bewundere Ihre außerordentlichen Anstrengungen, das Land wiederaufzubauen. Wir verstehen das, und unsere Meinung ist, dass Sie die Gelegenheit haben sollten, das Land wiederaufzubauen. Aber zu den arabisch-arabischen Konflikten, wie dem Grenzstreit mit Kuweit, haben wir keine Meinung.

Dann beklagte sich Saddam Hussein, dass die USA die meisten Bestellungen aus den USA blockieren würden. Er sagte:

”Wir können nichts in den USA kaufen. Nur Weizen. Weil immer, wenn wir etwas kaufen wollen, dann sagen sie, das sei verboten. Ich fürchte, sie werden eines Tages sagen: ‚Ihr wollt doch nur Pulver aus dem Weizen machen’.”

Auf Saddams Klagen über den mangelnden Zugang zum amerikanischen Markt sagte sie: ”Ich habe die direkte Anweisung vom Präsidenten, bessere Beziehungen zu Irak herzustellen.”

Die US-Administration behauptete, dass Iraks Streit mit Kuweit eine irakische Angelegenheit sei und keine amerikanische. Am 26. Juli 1990, am Tag nach dem Saddam-Glaspie-Treffen, wurde Margaret Tutweiler, Sprecherin des US-Außenministeriums von der Presse gefragt: ”Haben die Vereinigten Staaten den Irakern irgendeine Art diplomatischer Botschaft geschickt über die Aufstellung von 30.000 Truppen an der Grenze zu Kuweit? Hat es irgendeine Art Protest seitens der amerikanischen Regierung gegeben?” Sie antwortete: ”Mir ist nichts über einen derartigen Protest bekannt.”

Am 31. Juli 1990 sagte John Kelly, stellvertretender Außenminister für den Nahen Osten vor dem Kongress aus, dass ”die Vereinigten Staaten keine Verpflichtung haben, Kuweit zu verteidigen und keine Absicht haben, Kuweit zu verteidigen, wenn es von Irak angegriffen wird”.


Der irakische Außenminister Tariq Aziz verbreitete sehr schnell die Tatsache über die US-Kuweit-Kooperation, aber die Agenda war von Bush I geschrieben worden und über diese erdrückenden Beweise hörte man kaum einen Pieps. Die Welt hörte nur von ”nackter Aggression” und ”einem neuen Hitler”. In einem Brief vom 24. Oktober 1990 an die Vereinten Nationen hob Aziz die Handlungen der USA und Kuweits hervor, die schließlich zu der Besetzung von Kuweit durch den Irak führten. Viele entscheidende Punkte wurden angeführt, weshalb es wichtig ist, den ganzen Brief zu veröffentlichen:

"Ich schicke Ihnen die Kopie eines Briefes vom 22. November 1989 vom Generaldirektor des Staatssicherheitsdienstes an den Innenminister des vormaligen Regimes von Kuweit. Dieses gefährliche Dokument beweist die Existenz einer Verschwörung zwischen jener Regierung und der Regierung der Vereinigten Staaten zur Destabilisierung der Situation in Irak.

Ich erwähnte diese Verschwörung in einem Schreiben vom 4. September 1990, das ich an die Außenminister der ganzen Welt schickte. In jenem Brief erklärte ich den historischen Hintergrund und die Machenschaften der kuweitischen Führung gegen Irak wie folgt:

”Wir müssen daher folgern, dass die Führer des vormaligen Regimes wünschten, ihre Pläne solange zu verfolgen, bis die Wirtschaft Iraks zerstört und sein politisches System destabilisiert wäre. Es ist unmöglich zu glauben, dass ein Regime wie jenes, das zuvor in Kuweit an der Macht war, eine solch ambitiöse Verschwörung unternommen hätte ohne die Unterstützung und den Schutz einer Großmacht. Diese Macht können nur die Vereinigten Staaten sein.”

Ich machte in meinem Brief auch die folgenden Bemerkungen:

”Es ist aus meinem historischen Bericht und der Beschreibung der von mir geschilderten Ereignisse ersichtlich, das die Meinungsverschiedenheiten nicht nur auf ökonomischen und Grenzfragen beruhten. Wir hatten viele Differenzen dieser Art über 20 Jahre hinweg, doch wir versuchten immer, die bestmöglichen Beziehungen mit den vormaligen Führern von Kuweit aufrechtzuerhalten trotz deren verachtenswertem Verhalten und deren verächtlicher Haltung gegenüber Irak. Tatsache ist, dass es eine organisierte Verschwörung gab, an der die vormaligen Führer Kuweits mit der Unterstützung der Vereinigten Staaten mit Bedacht teilnahmen, um die Wirtschaft des Irak zu destabilisieren und seine Verteidigungsmöglichkeiten gegen die imperialistischen Ziele Israels und die Aggressionsakte von Teilen der arabischen Welt zu unterminieren. Um das zu erreichen, war es notwendig, das politische System Iraks zu unterminieren und die Hegemonie der Vereinigten Staaten in der Region zu stärken, insbesondere über die Erdölvorkommen. Tatsächlich war es, wie Präsident Saddam Hussein auf dem Gipfel von Bagdad erklärte und ich in meinem Schreiben an den Generalsekretär der Arabischen Liga andeutete, ein Krieg gegen Irak.”

Dieses Dokument beweist klar und unwiderleglich, dass die CIA und die Geheimdienste der früheren Regierung von Kuweit miteinander verbündet waren zu einem Anschlag auf die nationale Sicherheit, territoriale Integrität und die nationale Wirtschaft Iraks.

Ich wäre dankbar, wenn Sie freundlicherweise diesen Brief und den beigefügten Text als ein offizielles Dokument des Sicherheitsrates zirkulieren ließen."


http://www.focus.de/politik/ausland/tid ... 36902.html
Montag, 02.08.2010, 11:07
Zweiter Golfkrieg
Invasion im Morgengrauen
Hat die US-Regierung den Irak indirekt sogar ermutigt, in Kuwait einzumarschieren, nur um dann einschreiten zu können? Die USA hätten – auch hinsichtlich des Schutzes Israels – kein Interesse an einem starken Irak gehabt und Saddam Hussein mit der Kuwait-Invasion ins offene Messer laufen lassen, so die Theorie, die sich auf Gesprächsprotokolle aus einer Unterredung Saddams mit der damaligen US-Botschafterin April Glaspie stützt.

Die USA habe hierbei Neutralität suggeriert, Glaspie werden die Worte zugeschrieben: „Wir haben keine Meinung zu arabisch-arabischen Konflikten wie dem Grenzstreit mit Kuwait.“

http://www.embargos.de/irak/irak_belage ... ha0802.htm
Joachim Guilliard, Vortrag Friedenskongress in Hannover, 31.8.2002
Der Irak – ein belagertes Land
Vorgeschichte und Hintergründe eines angekündigten Krieges
Am 25. Juli 1990 hatte die US-Botschafterin April Glaspie der irakischen Führung versichert, ”keine Meinung zu arabisch-arabischen Konflikten wie Ihren Grenzstreitigkeiten (mit Kuwait; J.G.) zu haben”•[2]. Acht Tage später, am 2. August, marschierten irakische Truppen in Kuwait ein, das im Osmanischen Reich Teil des Iraks gewesen war, bis es Ende des 19. Jahrhundert von der britischen Kolonialmacht abgetrennt wurde.[3]
[1] “U.S. Operation Against Iraq Underway”, Stratfor, 14.8.2001 (http://www.stratfor.com)
[2] Excerpts From Iraqi Document on Meeting with U.S. Envoy, New York Times 23.9.1990 http://www.chss.montclair.edu/english/furr/glaspie.html
[3] Die britische Übernahme des wichtigsten Hafen am Golf, war damals auch eine Maßnahme, die sich gegen den – mit der Bagdadbahn verbundenen – Vorstoß des Deutschen Reiches in die Region richtete.

http://www.miprox.de/Wirtschaft_allgemein/Bandulet.html
http://www.goldseiten.de/content/kolumn ... ?storyid=7
Die unheimliche Großmacht
- Hinter den Kulissen der amerikanischen Weltpolitik -
Am 25. Juli 1990 empfing er die amerikanische Botschafterin April Glaspie, um zu sondieren, wie sich die USA bei einem irakischen Zugriff auf Kuwait verhalten würden. Antwort der Botschafterin: "Wir haben keine Meinung zu arabisch-arabischen Konflikten, wie Ihre Grenzstreitigkeiten mit Kuwait. Das Thema hat nichts mit Amerika zu tun."


George H. W. Bush elnök az "Új Világrend" kialakításának első lépcsőfokaként Irak legyőzését jelölte meg. Az úgynevezett "Operation Desert Strom“ elnevezésű Irak elleni katonai beavatkozás 1991.01.17-én kezdődött meg, 1991.02.26/27-én éjjel (5751. Adar 13., Eszter böjtje) pedig a Kuvait városából Irakba visszavonulni szándékozó (tehát nem harci tevékenységet folytató) iraki hadsereget és a velük tartó nagyszámú polgári személyt még az iraki határ elérése előtt az amerikai légierő maradéktalanul semmisítette ("Highway of Death") Norman Schwarzkopf tábornok irányítása alatt:

http://www.greenpeace-aachen.de/archiv/ ... l_esso.php
Verbrannter Mensch bei Napalm Angriff - Irak 1991
Am Ende des Krieges bombardierten die USA einen 10 Meilen langen Flüchtlings-Treck
auf der Straße nach Basra. Dieser Treck war gemischt aus zivilen und militärischen Fahrzeugen.
6 Stunden lang wurde der Treck mit Brandbomben und Splitterbomben eingedeckt.
Auf der Straße nach Jahra-Umm Qasr wurde ein anderer
60 Meilen langer Flüchtlings-Treck bombardiert.
Es gab keine Überlebenden !

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zweiter_Golfkrieg
Die Bombardierung der auf dem Rückzug befindlichen Truppen und der eingeschlossenen Zivilisten wurde von zahlreichen unabhängigen Beobachtern und Menschenrechtlern als Kriegsverbrechen eingestuft, unter anderem vom früheren US-Justizminister Ramsey Clark.

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highway_of_Death
Highway of Death
Als Highway of Death (englisch für Straße des Todes) wird eine Straße zwischen Kuwait und Basra bezeichnet, auf der während des Zweiten Golfkrieges in der Nacht vom 26. auf den 27. Februar 1991 sich zurückziehende irakische Truppen bombardiert wurden. Die Straße wurde von westlichen Nachrichtendiensten als Highway 80 bezeichnet.

In dem Konvoi der sich zurückziehenden Truppen in der Nacht vom 26. auf den 27. Februar 1991 befanden sich aller Wahrscheinlichkeit nach auch irakische und palästinensische Zivilisten. Die Bombardierungen wurden von zahlreichen unabhängigen Beobachtern und Menschenrechtlern als Kriegsverbrechen eingestuft, unter anderem vom früheren US-Justizminister Ramsey Clark. Während der Geschehnisse waren keine Reporter anwesend, doch ungefähr einen Monat nach den Ereignissen machten Fotografen Bilder von verbrannten Leichen und Autowracks.

http://deoxy.org/wc/warcrime.htm
WAR CRIMES
A Report on United States War Crimes Against Iraq to the Commission of Inquiry for the International War Crimes Tribunal
by Ramsey Clark and Others

Kép

Incinerated body of an Iraqi soldier on the "Highway of Death," a name the press has given to the road from Mutlaa, Kuwait, to Basra, Iraq. U.S. planes immobilized the convoy by disabling vehicles at its front and rear, then bombing and straffing the resulting traffic jam for hours. More than 2,000 vehicles and tens of thousands of charred and dismembered bodies littered the sixty miles of highway. The clear rapid incineration of the human being [pictured above] suggests the use of napalm, phosphorus, or other incindiary bombs. These are anti-personnel weapons outlawed under the 1977 Geneva Protocols. This massive attack occurred after Saddam Hussein announced a complete troop withdrawl from Kuwait in compliance with UN Resolution 660. Such a massacre of withdrawing Iraqi soldiers violates the Geneva Convention of 1949, common article 3, which outlaws the killing of soldiers who "are out of combat." There are, in addition, strong indications that many of those killed were Palestinian and Kuwaiti civilians trying to escape the impending seige of Kuwait City and the return of Kuwaiti armed forces. No attempt was made by U.S. military command to distinguish between military personnel and civilians on the "highway of death." The whole intent of international law with regard to war is to prevent just this sort of indescriminate and excessive use of force.
(Photo Credit: © 1991 Kenneth Jarecke / Contact Press Images)

"It has never happened in history that a nation that has won a war has been held accountable for atrocities committed in preparing for and waging that war. We intend to make this one different. What took place was the use of technological material to destroy a defenseless country. From 125,000 to 300,000 people were killed... We recognize our role in history is to bring the transgressors to justice." Ramsey Clark

Az áldozatok száma 125-300 ezerre tehető...
Másnap, 1991.02.28-án (5751. Adar 15-én, Purim) George H. W. Bush váratlanul fegyverszünetet jelentett be. Meglepő módon éppen Purimra jósolta meg Menáchem Mendel Schneerson rabbi a tárgyalt iraki háború végét...:

http://judaizmus.blogspot.de/2011/03/na ... er-24.html
2011. március 4., péntek
Naftali Kraus blogja
Egy get utóélete
Az águná csak röviddel pészách előtt kapta meg a getet, bár az öbölháború már púrimkor végetért.44

44A háború elején elmeséltem Jákov Ereznek, aki akkor a Mááriv főszerkesztője volt, hogy a lubávicsi rebbe azt mondta, púrimkor már túl leszünk a háborún. Amikor, éppen púrim napján vége lett, vittem be snapszot és süteményt és le-chájjimot ittunk. Erez megjegyezte, hogy ő „tudta”, hogy púrimkor nem lesz már háború, hiszen a rebbe ezt megmondta...

http://www.chabad.org/library/article_c ... Saddam.htm
Purim Saddam
By Tzvi Jacobs
David had never before heard of the Lubavitcher Rebbe. On that Shabbat, he learned about the Rebbe's predictions regarding the Gulf War, how the Rebbe publicly proclaimed that the Land of Israel would be safe and that nobody in Israel would need gas masks, and that it was said in the Rebbe's name that the Gulf War would end by Purim.

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Artic ... 4vbrNn9zyA
Published: Wednesday, March 26, 2003 3:19 AM
Judaism: This War is for Us
Stop and think for a moment: the last Gulf War in 1991 ended erev - just before - Purim. This Gulf War began motzei - just after - Shushan Purim. Get the picture? In between, "The Jews had light, and gladness, and joy, and honor." (Book of Esther 8:16)

Simply put another way, if all the world is a stage, then the Jews - and especially those in the Land of Israel - are the lead actors on the stage of history, and the goyim - the nations, i.e. the gentiles - have supporting roles, while the evil-doers are props and background scenery. As our tradition states, G-D - the great playwright - created the world for the sake of the Jewish People, and it is our responsibility to implement the Torah - absolute morality and the blueprint of creation - in it.

Stop and think for a moment: the last Gulf War in 1991 ended erev - just before - Purim. This Gulf War began motzei - just after - Shushan Purim. Get the picture? In between, "The Jews had light, and gladness, and joy, and honor." (Book of Esther 8:16)

http://www.beismoshiach.org/Moshiach/moshiach349.htm
MOSHIACH & GEULA
The Moshiach Dialogues
This is an allusion to the Gulf War, which concluded in Adar (5751/1991) on Purim. At that time, President Bush, Sr. didn’t finish the job. Loose ends were left that developed into the current situation. In spite of this, President Bush, Sr. recognized that as a result of that war, the entire world order had been changed.
The Rebbe stated explicitly that we had the merit to see the literal fulfillment of Isaiah’s prophecy on the Redemption (Isaiah 2:4) regarding swords being beaten into plowshares and spears into pruning hooks, by the provision of food and medicine using weapons of war.

http://www.chabad.org/kabbalah/article_ ... -Basra.htm
http://770live.com/en770/gulfwar.asp
The Kabbalah of Basra
By Yosef Y. Jacobson
The crisis begins
It was Sabbath afternoon, Aug. 18, 1990, when the Lubavitcher Rebbe, Rabbi Menachem M. Schneerson, addressed thousands of disciples at his headquarters in Brooklyn (1). The mood in the Jewish world was stern, as Saddam pledged war against Israel if he were attacked. The Rebbe quoted words of the Sages dating back some 1,500 years.

"The leader of Persia," states the Midrash, "will attack an Arab nation and the Arab king will go to Aram for advice. The leader of Persia will bring destruction to the entire world, and all of the nations will be struck by panic and fear ... Israel will also be overtaken by panic and fear, and they will cry, 'Where shall we go? Where shall we go'?

"Moshiach will then tell them: 'My children, fear not. Everything I have done, I have done for you. Why are you afraid? Do not fear! The time of your liberation has arrived (2).'

Who is Persia? Who is Aram?
A few weeks later, during the holiday of Sukkos (3) in October 1990, the Rebbe went on to explain that the Midrashic words "the leader of Persia" may be understood as "the leader of Iraq," since ancient Persia included the territory of present-day Iraq. "Aram," which in Hebrew means "exalted," or "powerful," refers to the world's superpower. Thus, "the Arab king going to Aram for advice" may represent an Arab country, Kuwait, coming to the U.S. for help (4).

"Despite the ominous situation," the Rebbe declared, "there was no reason to become confounded or fearful." On the contrary, this confrontation was heralding the time of our redemption, that moment in history when the authentic spiritual and moral core of humanity will emerge in its full splendor and heaven will become one with earth.

During the next months, the Lubavitcher Rebbe reiterated these Midrashic words numerous times, as he called on the Jewish people and the world to replace fear with courage and confusion with determination. We ought to prepare ourselves and the world at large, the Rebbe said, for the great spiritual revolution that will engulf the globe, by increasing in the study of Torah, the observance of mitzvos, and acts of goodness and kindness. Each and every one of us, the Rebbe suggested, should be teaching himself and the surrounding world about a higher way of living -- a life of ethics, honesty, goodness and peace. A life of Moshiach.

The war begins
The war began on Wednesday, Jan. 16, 1991. A tremendous part of the fighting was concentrated in Basra, that ancient port city off the Persian Gulf in southern Iraq, home to the Republican Guard and, according to many, the location of the dictator himself.

Three days later, on Sabbath, Jan. 19 (4 Shevat 5750), the Lubavitcher Rebbe devoted a large part of his public address to the war against Saddam Hussein. The Rebbe viewed Saddam - a person who chopped off the ears and noses of dissidents, tortured children in front of their parents, gassed thousands to death and craved the death of Israel - as a truly evil person.

The Rebbe saw him as a scion of the great anti-Semites of old, professing the legendary brutality and Jew-hatred of Nebuchadnezzar (ancient king of Iraq and Babylonia, arch-hero of Saddam), Amalek, Haman and Pharaoh.

The Rebbe knew very well of the ulterior motives accompanying so many American foreign-policy decisions. Yet he felt America and its values of freedom and individual liberty were a blessing for mankind, and that its war against a monstrous tyrant was a moral act, one that would save and liberate countless innocent lives.

I recall vividly how during his address on that Sabbath, the Rebbe encouraged the American armed forces to finish the job they had successfully begun. "Seventy or 80 percent of the work has been accomplished already," the Rebbe stated. "The job should be concluded 100 percent."

The Rebbe concluded by assuring the Jews living in Israel that they would be safe and secure. "There will be no war in Israel," the Rebbe stated. "Israel is the safest place in the world."

A strange instruction
During that time, I had the privilege of working as one of the oral scribes of the Rebbe, reviewing and transcribing his public talks for publication. That night, I received a telephone call from one of the Rebbe's secretaries, Rabbi Laibel Groner, who instructed me, in the name of the Rebbe, not to publish the segment of the talk that dealt with the U.S. war against Iraq.

The Rebbe had told his secretary at the time, that "these words will be applicable at a future time (10)."

As we all remember, the first Persian Gulf war ended only a few weeks after it began. On Thursday, Feb. 28, 1991, Saddam withdrew completely from Kuwait and a cease-fire was declared. The end of the war coincided with Purim, the day in which we celebrate the victory of the Jewish people against another tyrant and mass killer by the name of Haman who lived in that region some 2,400 years ago.

Two days later, on Sabbath, the 16th day of Adar 5751 (March 2, 1991) the Rebbe blessed the American government and its armed forces. He spoke of the U.S. as "a nation of generosity," allowing and encouraging Jews to live Jewishly in full freedom and prosperity. The Rebbe expressed a heartfelt prayer "that the American troops succeed in their mission in Basra (11)."

This last statement at the time was extremely perplexing. Did the Rebbe not know that the war had ended? Was the Rebbe unaware of the fact that the troops had withdrawn from Basra and from the rest of Iraq? After all, the Rebbe himself had predicted that the war would be over by Purim! Why, two days later, was the Rebbe praying for the success of an American campaign in Basra?

(1) The address is published in Sefer Hasichos 5750 vol. 2 pp. 631-641.
(2) Yalkut Shemoni Isaiah, remez 499 (Yalkut Shimoni is a 14th century anthology of Midrashic litrature). The same Midrash is found also in an older Midrashic text, Pesikta Rabsi section 36.
(4) In fact, in Pesikta referenced in footnote #2, the word Edom is used instead of Aram (this change is mentioned in Sefer Hasichos 5750 vol. 2 p. 692). Edom represents the West, an heir to the Roman Empire, founded by the descendants of Esau who lived in the ancient country of Edom, or Idumaea, southeast of Israel.
(10) The Rebbe used the famous biblical expression, "Od Chazon Lemoed."
(11) The Rebbe stated that they should not confuse Botzrah (Basra) with another city that has a similar name, Betzer. This enigmatic comment was apparently referring to a fascinating Talmudic teaching in which the spiritual angel of Edom will, at the end of days, run to Bozrah thinking that it is a city of refuge. In truth, he will mistake Bozrah with Betzer - Makos 12a, quoted in Rashi to Isaiah 63:1. Cf. Gitin 58b for an interesting exchange between Rabbi Yochanan and Reish Lakish on the location of Bozrah.
Benutzeravatar
Admin
Forum Admin
 
Beiträge: 123
Registriert: 05.2013
Wohnort: Deutschland
Geschlecht:


Zurück zu "Shem ha-Mephorash"

 
cron