I thought you were gone. Why are you still here? Go away. I didn't change anthing on my post baby...it's all still there. What are you talking about?
Justitia Themis
JoinedPosts by Justitia Themis
-
82
Should Israel cede Land to Palestine at the pre 1967 markers and recognize Palestinian Statehood.
by designs in -
-
-
82
Should Israel cede Land to Palestine at the pre 1967 markers and recognize Palestinian Statehood.
by designs in -
-
Justitia Themis
Here's some more idiots for ya Bothtower.. THANK GOD we have YOU to listen to and not these incredibly educated and well-connected individuals... :) Were you an elder or something?
- Source:
- Washington Report on Middle East Affairs ; Mar2004, Vol. 23 Issue 2, p9-9, 2/3p
Section: Special Report
After State Department officials and historians assembled in Washington, DC, last week to discuss the 1967 war in the Middle East, I am compelled to speak out about one of U.S. history's most shocking cover-ups.
On June 8, 1967 , Israel attacked our proud naval ship — the USS Liberty — killing 34 American servicemen and wounding 172. Those men were then betrayed and left to die by our own government.
U.S. military rescue aircraft were recalled, not once, but twice, through direct intervention by the Johnson administration. Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara's cancellation of the Navy's attempt to rescue the Liberty, which I personally confirmed from the commanders of the aircraft carriers America and Saratoga, was the most disgraceful act I witnessed in my entire military career.
To add insult to injury, Congress, to this day, has failed to hold formal hearings on Israel's attack on this American ship. No official investigation of Israel's attack has ever permitted the testimony of the surviving crew members.
A 1967 investigation by the Navy, upon which all other reports are based, has now been fully discredited as a cover-up by its senior attorney [see box on following page]. Capt. Ward Boston, in a sworn affidavit, recently revealed that the court was ordered by the White House to cover up the incident and find that Israel's attack was "a case of mistaken identity. "
Some distinguished colleagues and I formed an independent commission to investigate the attack on the USS Liberty. After an exhaustive review of previous reports, naval and other military records, including eyewitness testimony from survivors, we recently presented our findings on Capitol Hill. They include:
• Israeli reconnaissance aircraft closely studied the Liberty during an eight-hour period prior to the attack, one flying within 200 feet of the ship. Weather reports confirm the day was clear with unlimited visibility. The Liberty was a clearly marked American ship in international waters, flying an American flag and carrying large U.S. Navy hull letters and numbers on its bow.
Despite claims by Israeli intelligence that they confused the Liberty with a small Egyptian transport, the Liberty was conspicuously different from any vessel in the Egyptian navy. It was the most sophisticated intelligence ship in the world in 1967 . With its massive radio antennae, including a large satellite dish, it looked like a large lobster and was one of the most easily identifiable ships afloat.
- Israel attempted to prevent the Liberty's radio operators from sending a call for help by jamming American emergency radio channels.
- Israeli torpedo boats machine-gunned lifeboats at close range that had been lowered to rescue the most seriously wounded.
As a result, our commission concluded that:
- There is compelling evidence that Israel's attack was a deliberate attempt to destroy an American ship and kill her entire crew.
- In attacking the USS Liberty, Israel committed acts of murder against U.S. servicemen and an act of war against the United States.
- The White House knowingly covered up the facts of this attack from the American people.
- The truth continues to be concealed to the present day in what can only be termed a national disgrace.
What was Israel's motive in launching this attack? Congress must address this question with full cooperation from the National Security Agency, the Central Intelligence Agency and the military intelligence services.
The men of the USS Liberty represented the United States. They were attacked for two hours, causing 70 percent American casualties, and the eventual loss of our best intelligence ship.
These sailors and Marines were entitled to our best defense. We gave them no defense.
Did our government put Israel's interests ahead of our own? If so, why? Does our government continue to subordinate American interests to Israeli interests? These are important questions that should be investigated by an independent, fully empowered commission of the American government.
The American people deserve to know the truth about this attack. We must finally shed some light on one of the blackest pages in American naval history. It is a duty we owe not only to the brave men of the USS Liberty, but to every man and woman who is asked to wear the uniform of the United States.
This article is reprinted with permission from the Jan. 11 Houston Chronicle.
~~~~~~~~
By Thomas Moorer
Admiral Thomas Moorer, now retired, was chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff from 1970 to 1974. He is joined in the independent commission of inquiry by Gen. Ray Davis (recently deceased); Rear Adm. Merlin Staring, former Judge Advocate General of the Navy; and Ambassador James Akins.
- Source:
- Washington Report on Middle East Affairs ; Jan/Feb2004, Vol. 23 Issue 1, p75-75, 2/3p
Section: Human Rights
- Israel Affairs ; Autumn/Winter2004, Vol. 10 Issue 1/2, p29-59, 31p
This is a PDF and I am not going to bother to upload it. For those of you who are interested in accurate, authoritative information, you can pay for a membership in the online, SCHOLARLY database to access the information, OR go to your public library.
A report released Oct. 22 on Capitol Hill by former officials from the highest level of the military and government revealed that Israel "committed acts of murder against American servicemen and an act of war against the United States" when it deliberately attacked the USS Liberty and killed 34 American crewmembers in 1967 . (Findings of the Independent Commission of Inquiry are available on the Web at < http: //www.ifamericansknew.org/history/ussliberty.html >)
In a sworn affidavit read at the press conference, Capt. Ward Boston, chief attorney to the original 1967 Navy Court of Inquiry, stated that then-President Lyndon Johnson and then-Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara ordered the Court of Inquiry to cover up the attack by presenting it as a mistake.
"For more than 30 years I have remained silent on the topic of the USS Liberty," Boston stated. "I am a military man and when orders come in from the secretary of defense and president of the United States, I follow them.
"However, recent attempts to rewrite history compel me to share the truth," he explained. "In particular, the recent publication of Jay Cristol's book, The Liberty Incident, twists the facts and misrepresents the views of those of us who investigated the attack. . . Contrary to the misinformation presented by Cristol and others, it is important for the American people to know that it is clear that Israel is responsible for deliberately attacking an American ship and murdering American sailors. "
Commissioners asked for a new and honest naval inquiry into the 1967 attack, as well as an investigation as to why the U.S. government covered up the Israeli attack.
"The men of the USS Liberty were representing the U.S.," said Admiral Thomas Moorer, former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. "They were attacked for over two hours by Israeli air force and navy units, with 70 percent American casualties and the eventual loss of our best intelligence ship.
"These sailors and marines were entitled to our best defense," Moorer insisted. "We gave them no defense. The findings of this commission are irrefutable. Every other attack on a ship in our history has been investigated by our Congress except this one.
"Nor has Congress ever investigated the recall by the White House of U.S. Navy aircraft sent to rescue the Liberty while the ship was still under attack," he added. "The White House cancellation of the Navy's attempt to rescue the Liberty is the most disgraceful thing I have witnessed in my entire military career.
"Why would our government put Israel's interests ahead of our own? " the admiral asked. "Does it continue to do so? This is an important issue that should be investigated by an independent, fully empowered commission of the American government.
"Our own Independent Commission of Inquiry findings have grave implications for our national security and for the American people," Moorer said. "In order to confront this problem, the American people and our elected officers will need to overcome their fear of the pro- Israel lobby in the United States. "
Immediately following the Israeli attack, the ship's survivors were threatened with "court martial, imprisonment or worse" if they did not remain silent. However, with the passage of time, many have stepped forward to say that the attack was undeniably deliberate and that justice must be served. Despite numerous attempts to be heard, no previous inquiry has taken public testimony from surviving crewmembers.
— Courtesy If Americans Knew
-
82
Should Israel cede Land to Palestine at the pre 1967 markers and recognize Palestinian Statehood.
by designs in -
-
Justitia Themis
Yes..yes..Botchtower...you are soooo correct. Dubious sources...on EBSCO scholarly academic sources...yes....poor stupid scholars...should listen to BOTCHTOWER...poor stupid Justitia...BOTCHTOWER learned a new word after leaving JWs...strawman...but applies it incorrectly :)
Might I just say how much I truly enjoy NOT having to be around JW men...even the "ex" ones that really belonged there in the first place.
Botchtower can't attack the good Congressman's information, so he seeks to denigrate him because his conclusions differ from what Botchtower needs to believe.
nighty night sweetie....as I move on to soooo much more than you will ever have.... ;)
-
82
Should Israel cede Land to Palestine at the pre 1967 markers and recognize Palestinian Statehood.
by designs in -
-
Justitia Themis
Your point?
-
82
Should Israel cede Land to Palestine at the pre 1967 markers and recognize Palestinian Statehood.
by designs in -
-
Justitia Themis
The author of your citation is hardly a good source you know. His organization disseminates antisemitic cartoons, has supported people like Arafat, and recently praised the antisemitic words caught on video that got Helen Thomas
So...an ex-Republican Congressman isn't a good source? Why? Because he has a different viewpoint than you?
Hhhmmmm...perhaps Botchtower...as a Congressman...he has had a butt-full of Israel... :) Perhaps he is really pissed-off about AIPAC controlling U.S. politics. :) Perhaps he's a little tired of our Israeli welfare policy? :)
Regardless, he is a MUCH more credible resource than anyone YOU or anyone else has presented on this thread. : ) Give those Liberty boys a little respect O.K... apparently the Israeli airforce officers that REFUSED to fly the mission because THEY KNEW it was an American ship mean nothing to you either. So much for "mistakes of war."
-
82
Should Israel cede Land to Palestine at the pre 1967 markers and recognize Palestinian Statehood.
by designs in -
-
Justitia Themis
The US wasn't involved
Wow. Garbage in...garbage out. If you obtain you information from garbage sites, your conclusions will be garbage. I struggled to decide which article to post, and decided on this one because 1) the author is a Republican Congressman, which would likely carry weight with the pro-Israel people, and 2) it tells also the story, largely unknown outside the college educated in political science, of how Israel, with full intent and knowledge, fired upon one of our ships in the Strait killing U.S. soldiers. I encourage everyone to read this sad story in full and give your respect to those poor soldiers whose story is still largely unknown.
- Washington Report on Middle East Affairs; Aug2005, Vol. 24 Issue 6, p16-19, 3p
Israel's war crimes against the USS Liberty and its crew on June 8, 1967 — midway in the Six-Day War Israel launched against its Arab neighbors — provoked a startling, profound U.S. response, a cover-up that signaled the beginning of America's 38 years of Israel-centric foreign policies. It marked a costly, radical turn for the worse that sent America's prestige and credibility plunging and imposed on the American people ever-growing new burdens — even war — with no end in sight.
Perplexing as the assault remains to the few Americans aware of its details, it is no less so than the strange behavior of President Lyndon B. Johnson while the attack was still underway.
When attacked, the Liberty, an unarmed reconnaissance ship of the U.S. Navy, was moving slowly in international waters off the coast of Gaza and the Sinai. The day's horrors are detailed in a report filed on behalf of the ship's survivors by James R. Gotcher, general legal counsel for the USS Liberty Veterans Association, with the Secretary of Defense on June 8, 2005, the 38th anniversary of the assault. Among the Israeli crimes cited in the report are the following:
- sustained rocket, cannon and torpedo fire from air and sea that killed 34 U.S. sailors, wounded 173 others, and riddled the defenseless ship with holes, one of them 40 feet wide;
- gunfire that destroyed rubber lifeboats that were put in the water when the ship's captain ordered preparations to abandon ship; and
- the firing of napalm on the open deck where defenseless sailors were attempting to protect the ship.
The assault was deliberate. It was committed in broad daylight during a two-hour span in the afternoon, following a series of close-in aerial surveillance flights by Israeli aircraft hours earlier. The attack began three hours after Israel's naval command precisely identified the target as an unarmed U.S. Navy reconnaissance vessel. The American flag flew in a brisk breeze at the ship's stern. The large U.S. Navy insignia was clearly visible on the ship's hull.
When General Moshe Dayan issued the order to destroy the Liberty, one of the generals on his staff remonstrated: "This is pure murder." Several Israeli pilots, knowing the target was American, refused to take part. Testimony of survivors leaves no doubt that Israel's military high command intended to sink the ship and kill all personnel aboard, leaving no trace of Israel's responsibility.
It was a monstrous example of ingratitude, let alone murder.At the very moment Israeli forces were killing U.S. sailors, President Lyndon B. Johnson was secretly providing unmarked U.S. military aircraft and personnel to aid Israel in its war against neighboring Arab states.
It is difficult to imagine a goal that would lead the government of Israel, a beleaguered nation whose only substantial international support came from the United States, to attempt to destroy a military vessel and crew of its only benefactor.
Liberty survivors believe Israel's most likely goal was to lure the United States into joining the Jewish state as a fighting partner in its war against Arab states. The goal would be tempting. With America's mighty military forces battling at its side, Israel could reasonably expect that its nation's security would be guaranteed far into the future. Another motivation might have been the concern that the Liberty crew would learn that Israel planned to invade Syria the next day, and transmit that information to Washington.
Whatever the motive, the scheme would work only if Israel could make Egypt, the leading Arab combatant, appear to be responsible for obliterating the Liberty and its crew. That, of course, would require that Israel succeed in destroying all evidence of its own guilt.
Clearly, the risk of disclosure was immense. If only one U.S. sailor survived to tell the true story, or if just one outraged Israeli officer spoke out, the American people would demand severe retribution against Israel. Or so one would think.
The scheme might have worked, except for the ingenuity of Liberty radiomen. It failed because, despite Israel's intense jamming of airwaves and bombardment that wrecked the ship's radio equipment, the crew managed to transmit one lone message — a call for help that was received by a nearby U.S. aircraft carrier, as well as by Israeli intelligence.
The Liberty message spoiled any Israeli plans to blame Egypt. Israeli torpedo boats returned to the scene a few hours after the attack, this time offering help to Liberty survivors — an offer scornfully refused by the ship's skipper, Commander William McGonagle, still on the bridge despite severe leg wounds.Israel also sent regrets to the White House, claiming that Israeli forces believed their target was Egyptian.
Johnson's Astounding Response Just as astounding as the assault itself was the reaction of President Lyndon B. Johnson during that day and those that followed. He acted as if his chief responsibility was to protect Israel from harm and criticism. When he learned that a U.S. carrier had launched fighter aircraft to defend the Liberty, the president ordered the aircraft back to the carrier — the only time in U.S. naval history that rescue aircraft were called back while a Navy vessel was under assault.It was stark evidence that Johnson considered Israeli sensitivities and the well-being of Israeli attack personnel, more important than the lives of the American crewmen under his command.
After the assault, Johnson continued to place Israel's interests above those of Liberty survivors, taking immediate steps to protect Israel from any public protest that might arise. He accepted quickly Israel's excuse of mistaken identity, which his administration knew to be false. He ordered an immediate Navy Court of Inquiry but instructed the chairman, Admiral Isaac Kidd, to absolve Israel of guilt. (In a recent sworn statement, retired Navy Captain Ward Boston, Jr., a member of the Court of Inquiry, declared that he and Kidd were convinced all along that the assault was deliberate, not a case of mistaken identity. See March 2004 Washington Report, p. 10.)
The president also ordered Kidd to keep survivors from talking about their ordeal. As soon as they were brought ashore, Kidd complied with the presidential order by threatening the sailors, some still bedridden, with court martial and imprisonment if they said anything publicly.
When the court completed its quick, limited inquiry and prepared a report, Kidd admitted privately to a colleague that he knew it was misleading. Before it was released to the media, however, its text was further sanitized for Israel's benefit by Department of Defense civilian attorneys. One of the items they deleted was testimony by survivor Lloyd Painter, who told the court he witnessed Israeli forces deliberately shooting lifeboats to pieces.
Medals were issued to survivors, but in quiet ceremonies far from the White House and the president.
Many public documents related to the assault remain classified. Over the years, Liberty survivors have pleaded repeatedly with administration officials, congressional committees, individual members of Congress and the media for full disclosure of the truth. Only a few periodicals and networks responded. Only a handful of individual members of Congress, none in a leadership position, dared to speak out.
The court's false and misleading inquiry was the only official one ever held.Johnson's thorough cover-up was maintained by all of his successors in the presidency.
"An Israel-Centric Foreign Policy"
Three years ago, Condoleezza Rice, now President George W. Bush's secretary of state and then his national security adviser, unwittingly explained in a remarkable burst of candor: "We have an Israel-centric foreign policy." Rice's statement was profound and accurate. Although she spoke nearly four decades after the assault on the Liberty, her words explain why the cover-up began and why it continues to this day.
Since 1967, many people in and out of government have learned the truth about the cover-up. Why were they silent? Why did reporters ignore tips that would surely lead to top news stories?
The sad and simple truth is that most Americans, especially those in public office and even those in the presidency, have a deadly fear of being labeled anti-Semitic. No matter how well documented the charges, they will neither utter nor write anything critical of Israel, for fear it will draw that unwarranted and unwelcome charge. Former U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. George W. Ball once stated that the most powerful instrument of intimidation employed by Israel's U.S. lobby is the "reckless charge of anti-Semitism."
The fear is endemic, but rarely mentioned. It reaches all government offices and intimidates all levels and sections of our society — business, education, academia, preachers, publishing and other media.
Among those who know the facts about Israeli influence, almost all can supply an excuse to remain silent. The few willing to speak out get little or no attention.
Pro-Israel forces long ago successfully redefined anti-Semitism to mean any criticism of the State of Israel. The new definition is false, malicious and damaging to our national interests, but the Liberty crew and their supporters are among the few willing to risk the anti-Semitic smear.
As a result of this silence, most citizens are unaware of the startling fact that for years our country's Middle East policy has been crafted not by seasoned experts who are committed to America's basic national interests, but by lobbies for two politically powerful religious communities whose goals are narrowly focused. One community is relatively small in number but powerful in influence. It consists mainly of zealous secular Jews, as well as radical Orthodox Jews. They are perhaps best described as extreme Zionists. The other community is very large, consisting of many millions of Christians who accept a controversial interpretation of the Bible's Book of Revelation.
Both groups believe present-day Israel is a resurrection of ancient Israel and a preeminent part of God's plan. Both believe the Jewish state must be kept strong and united until the arrival on earth of each group's messiah.
They have attained such political power that Congress dutifully appropriates billions to Israel without conditions or serious discussion, much less real debate. Because of this unrestricted aid year after year, Israeli leaders have been able to violate human rights, engage in lawless behavior, abandon the ideals of Judaism, and lure America into damning complicity in this scofflaw conduct.
The complicity reached a fateful peak in 1982, when the U.S. government supplied the arms and material that Israel used in slaughtering 18,000 Beirut civilians, then, adding insult to injury, immediately replenished Israel's supply of weapons and ammunition. Osama bin Laden recently stated publicly that he planned 9/11 as the payback for the supportive U.S. role.
The lobby's grip on our government is unhealthy for both Israel and the United States. It is also unhealthy for both Christianity and Judaism. If our nation is to emerge from today's peril, we must face openly and critically the role of these religious groups and their passionate, dangerous attachment to a single small scofflaw government. If we keep tiptoeing around reality, we risk still greater peril tomorrow.
The Liberty cover-up will someday be recognized as an historic but wrong turning point for America. It convinced Israeli leaders that they could get by with anything — even mass murder of U.S. sailors — with only a helpful reaction from Washington, because that is what actually happened.
It proved ultimately to be a fateful blunder for both Israel and America. It was the first major example of America's Israel-centric foreign policy that has led our people into ever-deepening trouble. It inaugurated endless, ever-mounting U.S. aid to Israel, all of it unconditional and with no accountability required. For Israel, it cleared the path for more aggressive military conquest and abuse. It reinforced its contempt for legal constraints and world opinion.
Had the truth about the assault on the Liberty been officially disclosed in detail at any point since 1967, public outrage would have forced an immediate end to our Israel-centric foreign policy. Unconditional aid to Israel would come to a halt. All future U.S. aid would have been tied to firm conditions and accountability procedures — as demanded of all other recipients. This, I believe, would have protected Israel from law-breaking. Years ago, I heard Moshe Dayan, then Israel's pre-eminent political and military leader, state plainly that Israel would have no choice but to obey U.S. requirements if they were conditions of eligibility for U.S. aid.
As I ponder the awful price paid by the Liberty survivors, I marvel — and recoil — at the grip the government of Israel, a small nation of about five million people, maintains over America, a nation of nearly 300 million. After many years in politics, I am convinced that this is America's greatest burden today. Indeed, the phenomenon reaches far broader and deeper than the fate of the Liberty and its crew, important as their fate is to hundreds of families and in the proud annals of the U.S. Navy.Israel's murderous assault, although an egregious example of how costly this burden can be, is not the only example, nor the most recent one.
The report filed with the Pentagon by Liberty survivors could become America's turn for the better.
The scheme would work only if Israel could destroy all evidence of its own guilt.
~~~~~~~~
By Paul Findley
Former Congressman Paul Findley (R-IL)
-
82
Should Israel cede Land to Palestine at the pre 1967 markers and recognize Palestinian Statehood.
by designs in -
-
Justitia Themis
I wrote a paper on this about two years ago. I don't have all my research with me since I am living in a different city attending law school. However, I had saved to this laptop a timeline I created to keep the facts straight on what actually led up to the "creation" of Israel. It might provide valuable insight as to why the Palestinians and Arabs in general are so pissed off about this issue. If you read it, you will notice that Israel introduced terrorism to the region and used it to get the Brits. to leave. BTW, since this was for personal research, I didn't spell check or anything.
1914 Palestine has 66,000 Jews and 570,000 Arabs, lived together in relative peace;both Jews and Arabs consider themselves “Palestenian.”
1916 Sykes-Picot agreement (spheres of influence) give Britain influence in Palestine (French
agree.
1916 Brits give conflicting messages to the Arabs. McMahon tells Hashemite Sharif Hussein
that British support Arab independence, but Brits also sign Balfour Declaration to “view
with favour the estabslishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people.”
1918 Allied/Arab forces caputured Damascus; Brits give Hussein’s son, Faisal, the regime.
1919-
1922 Britain secures mandates over Palestine/Iraq, establish Transjordan, make Abdallah (Faisal’s brother) emir. Brits made Faisal (France deposed him from Damascus) king of Iraq.
1922 Britain affirms right of Jews to live in Palestine, but limit Jewish immigration, pledge not to support Jewish majority rule or statehood.
1930 Britain signs mutual defense treaty with Iraq.
1932- Abdul Aziz Ibn Saud establishes Saud’s Arabia.
1933- US Zionist have only 65,000 members/ moderate leader, Rabbi Wise, favors polite lobbying and philantrhropy.
Roosevelt/Palestine up to 1945. Strong public lobbying. Personal presidential advisors increasingly Jewish and promoting Zionism; State Dept./Pentagon vigorously warn of danger to ME peace of Jewish state/may push Arabs to Soviets/Communism. Roosevelt mostly stands-up to Zionists even if it harmed his domestic political position.
1938- Britain discusses repudiating Balfour, Christian evangelical belief that return of Jews to homeland fulfills Bible prophecy influences Congress; 62 reps/9 senators advise Roosevelt to protest.
1939 Arab revolt, because of massive Jewish immigration. Numbers now 66,000 (1920), 170,000 (1929), 400,000 (1936=31% pop.)
1939- tells Zionist Organization of America that “deeply concerned” about White Paper, but can’t do much because of international situation
1939 White Paper, Britain senses need of Arab support in WW2, limits Jewish immigration to 75,000 over 5 years, prohibits Jews from purchasing land outside settlements. Palestenians to gain gradual control of admin. Offices, statehood with 10 years. (wartime expediency sets stage to inflame conflict.) However, Britain bans political activity…how can they establish a functioning government if political activity is banned?
1940 prior to 1940, US has little interest in ME, accepts/defers to Anglo-French hegemony.
1941 Frustrated with Brits, exiled al-Husayni offers to collaborate with Nazis to expel Brits.
1941- Roosevelt rejects Zionist request that he pressure Churchill to create a 50,000 Jewish Brigade within the British Army.
1941- Roosevelt rejects Zionist pressure to endorse Jewish state in Palestine.
6/1941Roosevelt tells Jewish leaders to trust Britain to defend Palestinian Jews.
1942- Militants Rabbi Silver and Ben-Gurion get resolution at Zionist convention demanding immediate termination of Brit. Mandate, establishment of Jewish state in Palestine. Silver founds American Zionist Emergency Council to lobby aggressively lobby Congress.
1943- Jewish leaders press Britain for pledge of postwar statehood; Brits/US jointly declare British presence in Palestine critical to war; no discussion until war over.
1943- Roosevelt delcars Saudi critical to US national interests, provides military/economic aid, statehood. Saud reacts to growing US Zionist movement. Roosevelt promises to consult Arab leaders before changing any US policy regarding Palestine.****
6/43- Roosevelt gets intense pressure from Zionists; Weizmann, through Treasury Secretary Morganthau and Special Counsel Rosenman promote welfare of European Jews. Morganthau says ‘Arabs must be told Jews have right to Palestine.’
1944- US intelligence officers discover Soviet agents in Cairo to spread communism. Office of Strategic Services concerned that “a vocal and influential segment of US public opinion” [Jews] might stimulate Anglo-US tensions, undermine US interests in Arab states, allow Soviet Union to enter the region.” Arab leaders staunchly anti-Soviet, so US professes non-Zionism to Arab leaders.
1944- ELECTION eve. Roosevelt caves slightly to Zionist for reelection. Dems and Repub. Both support unlimited Jewish immigration. Zionist tell Roosevelt that they have Dewey who will say Britain should revoke White Paper. To get Zionist vote w/out angering Churchill, Roosevelt calls for land surveys to facilitate Jewish settlement.
1944- Roosevelt gets reelected; resists Zionist. Zionist pressure leads to numerous Congressmen, joint bipartisan resolution endorsing Jewish statehood in Palestine; ask Roosevelt to endores. Saudi, Egypt, Iraq, Syria, Yemen strongly protest. Pentagon warns Roosevelt/Congress that passage will damage military interest. Speaker Sam Rayburn kills it, prophetically warns “illustrates what happens if delicate international situations get into party politics.” ****
2/45- Arabs getting angry at Zionist involvement in US politics. Roosevelt in personal meeting with Saud says, “No decision altering the basic situation of Palestine should be reached without full consultation with both Arabs and Jews.” ***2 nd time promised.
Truman (Evangelical Christian)/Palestine after 1945. Truman busy with the War, little to study/understand ME, policy lacks presidential leadership. Cold War means US security experts greatly concerned with Arab interests/critical to Soviet containment. Truman’s personal advisers start protesting the “anti-Zionist” stance of Pentagon/State Dept. and poison water between president and bureaucracy. Britain experience increasing trouble controlling violence in region.
1944- Jewish terrorists assassinate Lord Moyne. militant groups becoming more aggressive. Haganah (Jewish Resistance Organization)=50,000 soldiers. Irgun=Menachem Begin, Lohama=Stern Gang.
1945- Haganah (Ben-Guiron) angry that Brits won’t increase immigration/promote Jewish statehood sabotage British railroad/oil installations.
1945- Because of US critical interests in ME, NEA’s Loy Henderson advises US must become more active in ME. Viewed Britain and its oil concessions as a rival for commercial interests. Back off position because of Cold War.
1945- Labour party elected in Britain; determine to dismantle colonial structure in ME. Have trouble stopping smuggling of Jews into Palestine, 70,000 from May 45- May 48. Also, Palestinian Jews becoming more militant.
1945- Truman tells Brit. PM Attlee that 100,000 Jewish immigrants s/b allowed into Palestine. British Foreign Secretary Ernest Bevin states that only reason Truman wanted the Jews in Palestine is so that they wouldn’t come to the US, that 100,000 immigrants would “set aflame the whole ME”, and if Truman wanted them to do that, then send 4 divisions of US soldiers to control the area. J You go boy!!! Truman backs off but, on 9/29 publicly endorses it to help defeat Jewish Repulican in NY mayor’s race. After election, backs off and tells Zionists they need to furnish him with 500,000 soldiers to fight the Arabs, otherwise, must “negotiate” a while.
11-45 Brits tired of Palestine and US, creates joint US-Anglo AACOI=Anglo-American Committee of Inquiry into the Problems of European Jewry and Palestine.
4-46 AACOI recommends allowing 100,000 Jewish immigrants…surprise…abolish restrictions on Jewish land purchase, establish international trustee to govern Palestine, but advised against both Jewish and Palestinian statehood. Truman publicly endores, asks Brits. To revoke White Paper.
5-46 Arab Summit-declares AACOA lack legal authority, asserts conspiracy between committee and Zionists, warns that mass immigration will provoke war in Palestine.
7-46 AACOI leaders try to implement plan, advance Morrison-Grady plan to divide Palestine in 4 districts (Palestinian, Jewish, Jerusalem, Negev.). Palestinian/Jewish would self-govern civil issues, British commission would control defense, police, trade. Zionists like, Arabs don’t. issue get referred to UN. UN recommends partition.
8-46 Ben-Guiron gains control of Jewish Agency over moderate Chaim Weizmann, determing to mess with Truman in view of Nov. elections.
10-46 predictable split in US officials opinions. WH advisor Niles (son of Russian Jewish immigrants/Zionist) says should support/State Dept. says no. Trume makes Yom Kippur Statement eve of holiday that US government supports. Doesn’t help. Dewey and Republicans win control of Congress in Novemeber elections. Britain and Arab states go ballistic. Saudi’s accuse Truman of supporting “Zionist aggression” Officials @ Arabian-American Oil Company consider re-chartering as a British corp. to avoid anti-US backlash. Brits’ complain US destabilizing the region.
1946- Brits respond to Jewish terrorism, Operation Agatha, Brit. Soldiers sweep Jewish strongholds, arrest militants, sieze weapons. One month later, Irgun bombs King David hotel in Jerusalem, center of British military/political authority, kill 92. Brits. Declare marshall law. Brits. Start considering withdrawal, don’t think Palestine has much value.
1946- King Saud hires Americans to engineer a ten-year infrastructure modernization plan.
1946- Pentagon officials fear Zionism a threat to US security, predict establishment of Jewish state will throw ME into war.
1947- CIA reports ME oil reserves critical to Marshall Plan, ME “essential to…security…US.” US investors own 23.75% of Iraq’s oil industry.
1947 US Zionist membership now over 1 mil. White House receives 135,000 letters demanding creation of Jewish state.
2-47 Brit. Refers situation to UN.
4-47 US establishes UNSCOP (UN Special Committee on Palestine.
6-47 Truman irritated with Zionist’s trying to impact UNSCOP, urged citizens to avoid prejudicing committee. US consul in Jersusalem, Robert Macatee remarks that UNSCOP has been “feted ad nauseum b the Jewish Community.” Arab leaders take reverse strategy and refuse to cooperate. Syria, Saudi, Yemen and the Arab League say biased, Palestinians boycott.
8-47 UNSCOP report advises termination of British mandate, independence of Palestine. 8 members endorse partition, with independence after a two-year period.
11-47 With significant US support, UN Gen. Assemb. Passes partition resolution. US/Arab relations immediately tank. British say going to cut/run, not help with enforcing partition, will remove troops by August 1948. Nearly all State Dept. officials opposed partition, NEA supports international trusteeship. CIA predicts will spawn violence, instability, xenophobia, and communist activity. When Joint Chiefs say partition no good, Joseph Bendersky calls the military “anti-Semitic.” Nile’s (Zionist) urges Hilldring be replaced. State Dept. tries to appease Arabs by allocating the Negev, but Truman says no after Weizmann (Zioninst) pressures him. What Truman DIDN’T know is that US citizens (Zionists) and members of Congress (caving to Zionists) claiming to speak for the US had pressured, bribed, and threatened to stop US aid to UN members to get them to vote in favor. Egypt revoks Pentagon’s overfly privilege and use of Farouk Field. Rest of ME blows up in mob violence.
11-47 Truman imposes arms embargo to Palestine and neighboring Arab states. Jewish Agency officials, White House Zionists press him to allow Jews to arm. When he doesn’t, Zionists smuggle airplanes, explosives, and ammo, while Britain secretly arms the Arab’s over low-key US State Dept. protests. State Dept. renews protests over partition b/c of Zionist meddling in UN vote and Arab reaction. Again as Truman to recommend UN establish trusteeship. Truman approves**; see March 5
12-47 British announce they are out of Palestine May 48.
2-48 UN imposes Truman’s arms embargo.
2-48- Exhuasted by Zionist politicking, Truman denies Weizmann’s audience request. Longtime friend and buss. Partner of Truman’s, Eddie Jacobson, intervenes. Truman tells him he is committed to partition, and no one tells the State Dept. that Truman has changed his mind.**Austin announces new anti-partition stance to UN. Clifford accuses State Dept. of deliberately misstating Truman’s position (which they did not) and Zionists accuse him of double-crossing them.
3-48- Truman clarifies stance; says supports trusteeship as temporary measure, UN Security Council votes to reconsider partition. Zionist groups organize public rallies to pressure Truman. Zionists mount smear campaign against NEA Director Loy Henderson, advocate of trusteeship, Truman replaces him with Hilldring. Jewish Agency and World Jewish Congress intensly lobby Congress.
3-48 Palestinian forces threaten Jewish settlements, Haganah secures area, opens a corridor to Jewish Jersusalem. However, Palestenians and Arab League do not declare a Palestinian state. ??
4-48 UN GA circulate trusteeship charter. No country wants to enforce it. JCS predict will need up to 200,00 soldiers…sound familiar???
4-48- Irgun and Stern Gang forces attach Arab village, Dier Yasin, kill 250, half are women/children.
4-48- UN Security Council passes cease-fire resolution on April 17, and establish Truce Commission. Jewish Agency says will accept truce only with statehood, Arab League demands partition revocation and moratorium on Jewish immigration. April 26, Arab leaders decide to occupy Palestine on termination of mandate.
5-48 - British mandate expires, National Council of Jewish Communities declares Israeli independence, form provisional government and Israeli Defense Forces (IDF). Israel established. Now a nation, Israel struggles with diplomacy. They are used to devious, back-channel diplomacy, struggle to use formal channels, and realize that they have weakend their relationship with US. Within 11 mins. Truman approves official US recognition, but withhold de jure recognition. Arabs strongly react. US officials afraid they will run to Soviets, relieved when Soviet Union extends full, de jure recognition witin days. Soviets motivated by affinity for Israelis as fellow Nazi victims, and awareness that Israel will allow them to function politically, WHILE THE ARAB STATES CONSISTENTLY REPRESSED COMMUNISM.
5-48 Arab-Israeli War.
1950- State Dept. links ME trade with Atlantic Charter’s vision of global capitalists free trade. “prospterity of Western World closely link with fate of Near Eastern countries.”
1950- Truman tells Israeli Ambassador Eban that the “striped-pants boys in the State Department are against my policy of supporting Israel” and would “soon find out who’s the President.” Calls them effeminate, snobbish, disloyal “tea hounds.” ???
War misc. after demise of imperialism, Arab states tend to compete for regional power, so don’t play well together, can’t coordinate military tactics, get beaten by Israel. Truman focused on reelection and Soviet Blockade in Berlin.
5-48 Bernadotte of Swedon appointed as mediator.
8-48 115 US soldiers assigned as observers to “Truce Commission.” “Firmness dilemma starts developing, US/Israel argue re: arms embargo. US observers have “unanimous disgust at Jewish actions.” Blame IDF for 90% of truce violations.
9-48 Israeli terrorist murder Bernadotte. His final framework was Arabs acquiesce to existence of Israel, Jordan annex portions of Palestine not designated to Israel, both have to approve border alterations…billed as “territorial compromise” Internatinal regime to govern Jerusalem, Israel to repatriate Palistenians. Arabs refuse to negotiate, mad because no mention of Arab state
10-48 State Dept. tells Israelis that Egypts occupation of Negev gives them some standing; inadvertently motivates Ben-Gurion to seize northern Negev.
11-48 Presidential election, both parties agree not to campaign on foreign policy issues. Israeli’s push both parties to denounce Bernadette’s plan, which became popular after his murder…cause bi-partisan consensus to collapse. Both candidates issue statements that Israel’s borders shouldn’t be changed. Causes “influence dilemma” everyone is irritated with meddling Jews.
12-48 UN rejects Bernadotte plan, establishes Palestine Conciliation Commission (PCC), us, French, turks,
1-50 Brits and Israel tussle over Egypt, when in December Israel invades; Brits have mutual support treaty, must defend Egypt. Israeli’s shoot down five British planes.
-
82
Should Israel cede Land to Palestine at the pre 1967 markers and recognize Palestinian Statehood.
by designs in -
-
Justitia Themis
First...to be clear...Israel wouldn't be "ceding" land. They don't own the land, and every major nation in the world, including the U.S. has acknowledge that. The Arabs were kicking Israel's butt during the 1967 war when the U.S. stepped in and overwhelmed their forces. Because of that, the UN ruled the land that was taken during the final land-grabbing moments of that war to be illegal.
Israel has been in violation of customary and international law from that time forward, on this issue and many others.
So, yes, Israel will need to go back to the '67 borders, since that was the last legitimate border. Jerusalem needs to be placed under UN mandate, so that it belongs to nobody. The next hurdle is the right of return. According to international law, when land is illegally taken through acts of war, the civilians who fled retain the "right of return." Israel will need to pay those Palestinians for the land they took.
The Palestinians need to deal with the fact that Israel is here to stay, and they aren't going to get all their land back.
To provide perspective, in 1914 there were 66,000 Jews living in the area and 570,000 Arabs. At the time, both groups referred to themselves as Palestians and peacefully coexisted.
-
59
New Curcuit Overseer Brainwash Talk....Obey the Slave even if you find a serious Flaw in JW Doctrine
by foolsparadise inhttp://www.sixscreensofthewatchtower.com/media/circuit-overseer-5-15-11.mp3.
.
brainwashing at its best here.
-
-
Justitia Themis
That was painful.
So recapping...Peter got the vision to allow Gentiles in, baptized Cornelius, but the governing body didn't really take it seriously for 13 years, but Peter just shut up the took it, and we should too.
That can EASILY be turned on them. During those 13 years...did Peter just sit there, keep quiet and do nothing? No, he continued his work, disregarding the belief of the "governing body" and the GENTILE congregation grew. During that time, did the governing body send elders to him threatening to disfellowship him for apostacy? No.
Peter continued on doing what he knew from Jehovah was right and totally disregarded what the governing body's opinion...and LOOK, Jehovah blessed him. Eventually, that old, narrow-thinking, steeped in old doctrine, governing body who just didn't "get it" FINALLY came around.
-
17
How would you respond to this JW apologist??
by Black Man inhey all - as some of you may know, i've been engaged in a pretty big debate with family members as well as internet acquaintances over whether the jw's are a cult.
thanks to everyone who have posted links to threads that have helped me in my dialogue with them - its actually working.
the latest is that one of the posters i've been dialoging and he says that agrees with me on many points but he brought up the following response and i ask (how would you respond to this) that i have posted below (by the way, the person he references as gq is me - its my username on that web site):.
-
-
Justitia Themis
He's basically acknowledged that a lot of the JW BS is garbage, but that his friends and family seem prosperous being in the cult. What are good ways to counter this thinking?
Why do you feel the need to counter his thinking?