Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : War -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Zeev Hed who wrote (1681)	6/7/2001 10:28:54 AM
From: Hawkmoon	Respond to of 23908

in my opinion, the Arabs have lost the right to control east Jerusalem when they barred (in violation of the 1949 armistice agreement) free access to the holy places I would definitely agree with that statement Zeev. But one could make the claim that the Jews were also realizing what had originally been promised to them by the British and League of Nations, in exchange for their support against the Turkish Ottomans. After all, every nation in the region was carved out of the former Ottoman empire, with most of the geographical allocations simply granted unilaterally to those sheikhs who had allied themselves with the British during WWI. mtholyoke.edu jajz-ed.org.il So thus, since everyone seems to casually throw around UN resolutions supporting their positions about the Palestinians, I find it somewhat amazing that they ignore that the mandates of its preceding organization, the League of Nations, madated that a Jewish homeland would be created in Palestine. It said NOTHING about a Palestinian homeland... merely a Jewish homeland. And furthermore, the mandate under Article 25 declared that territories between the Jordan River and the eastern boundary of the mandate were open to further revision. Thus, it can be inferred that the mandate intended that all territories west of the Jordan were to be apportioned to the Jewish homeland, with the east bank of the Jordan being left open to future allocation (as occurred when the Hashemite King Abdullah was granted that territory). mtholyoke.edu ARTICLE 25. In the territories lying between the Jordan and the eastern boundary of Palestine as ultimately determined, the Mandatory shall be entitled, with the consent of the Council of the League of Nations, to postpone or withhold application of such provisions of this mandate as he may consider inapplicable to the existing local conditions, and to make such provision for the administration of the territories as he may consider suitable to those conditions, provided that no action shall be taken which is inconsistent with the provisions of Articles 15, 16 and 18." And we should note that once Jordan annexed the West Bank in 1948, they violated Articles 15, 16, and 18, in violation of the Mandate (dealing with free access and practice of religion for all faiths). But we all know that these international rulings, whether from the League, or the UN, are only worth the paper they are printed on. The conflict between the Israelis and Palestinians is a matter of "might makes right", as unfortunate as that may be. It's a battle of wills between the two parties, with the Palestinians being pawns for the manipulation of neighboring Arab states who fear the rise of a prosperous Palestinian people paying no homage to royal lineage. Hawk

To: Zeev Hed who wrote (1681)	6/7/2001 11:12:23 AM
From: GUSTAVE JAEGER	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 23908

It seems to me that the 1967 seizure of East Jerusalem was a crafty scheme by the CIA/Israeli combo.... K(isl)ing Hussein was on the CIA's payroll after all: So soon after his death, it is difficult to assess King Hussein's life and accomplishments as ruler of a small, weak country on the immediate periphery of events that have had deeply divisive effects upon Middle Eastern, European and North American politics. In my opinion, King Hussein was better in some ways and worse in others than his public reputation. The number of assassination attempts and plots against his life has been exaggerated by Israel and its supporters in the U.S., by the king's own spin doctors, and by the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency. The CIA maintained a cozy relationship, part of it as secret paymaster, with Hussein for 40 years. His reputation as "the brave young king" was built on events that started with his seemingly miraculous escape from the assassin at the al-Aqsa mosque who killed his grandfather. But the king was, in fact, a brave man, both physically and in making bold decisions, such as the separate peace with Israel. That peace remains unpopular with most Jordanians, whether from the East or West Bank territories. Nor was King Hussein afraid to throw out Glubb Pasha after Britain's secret collusion with France and Israel to attack Egypt in October 1956. After Glubb and the British were gone, the United States eventually picked up the financial subsidy. But the king didn't know for sure that this would happen when he dismissed the British commander of his army. A well-known American journalist recently blamed Hussein for opening fire on Israeli forces in Jerusalem after Israel attacked Egypt in June 1967. But the truth is that the stage was set for the sequence of events that enabled Israeli forces to occupy East Jerusalem and the West Bank when, in early 1967, Israeli forces viciously attacked the Palestinian West Bank village of Samu, near Bethlehem, which was under Jordanian administration, killing about 40 villagers. The "justification" for the Israeli assault was a fake claim of infiltration attacks from Samu on Israel. As Jordanian soldiers moved in with trucks and armored cars to halt the Israeli attack, they were ambushed by Israeli tanks and artillery. More than 200 Jordanian soldiers were killed and a hundred Jordanian vehicles destroyed. All the circumstances point to a carefully planned Israeli provocation. As a consequence, the king made a defense treaty with Egypt and Syria. When Israel launched its June 5, 1967 "pre-emptive attack" on his new allies, the king fulfilled his treaty obligation to come to their defense. This gave Israel the pretext it needed for a long-planned attack. Within hours Israel had seized East Jerusalem and the entire West Bank, which it still holds. So the brave young king --B.Y.K. to two generations of Middle East hands-- reigned for 47 years by performing a magical balancing act in the minds of his Western admirers, including especially friends of Israel in the American media, that held old trans-Jordan together. But it will be prudent for all concerned, especially Jordan's new King Abdallah, to keep in mind that deep in their hearts most Palestinians see the Hashemite family-the first King Abdallah, and, despite his many admirable personal qualities, the late King Hussein as well-as having betrayed their chances for a state of their own more than half a century ago. Andrew I. Killgore, a retired career foreign service officer and former U.S. ambassador to Qatar, is the publisher of the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs. Excerpted from: washington-report.org