.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

Emet m'Tsiyon

Sunday, February 13, 2011

More on the US pro-Islam, pro-Arab Policy

US policy in the Middle East in the 20th century followed in the footsteps of British Middle Eastern policy, and can be seen as a continuation of it. It was no accident that the British upper crust called the American elite "our American cousins." Indeed, this was often true in a literal sense as many titled Britishers married rich American men and women. Therefore, cousins were found on both sides of the Atlantic.

British policy announced a pro-Islamic turn in 1920 when the Supreme Command of the WW One allies, the Entente powers, ordered the Greek army to stop advancing in Anatolia, and thereby to stop defeating the Turkish army. There is reason to believe that Britain was the leading power pushing for the order to the Greeks to stop. In that same year, British officers in Jerusalem --in what was then officially called Occupied Enemy Territory Administration-South-- encouraged Haj Amin el-Husseini to instigate anti-Jewish riots in order to discourage Great Power approval of the Jewish National Home principle at the San Remo Conference. This British encouragement for Arab violence against Jews in Israel was not at that time the official policy out of London but seems to have been a local initiative of British officers in the country, some or all of whom had been influenced by the notorious Tsarist forgery/plagiarism, the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Later, the London policy towards the Jewish National Home followed the local initiative and became hostile to the Jews, encouraging Arab hostility to Jews in the country. In other words, the Arabs became a tool of London for its own anti-Jewish hostility.

Back in Anatolia, in 1922, naval ships of the UK, US and other Western Great Powers watched as Ataturk's new Turkish army drove the Greeks of Anatolia and Smyrna into the sea at the Smyrna port, although Greek boats of all sorts were allowed to pick up refugees. Meanwhile, the powers did not oppose renewed massacres of Armenians in the city [see George Horton, Marjorie Housepian]. The new revolutionary Soviet Union also sided with the Turks in those years, thereby taking the same stance as the Western capitalist powers.

In other parts of the British Empire, the British encouraged Muslims against non-Muslims, and Arabs against non-Arab Muslims. In India, the UK encouraged Muslim demands for a separate state ["pakistan", which had never existed before] against the aspiration of the Indian National Congress for a unified India. In the former Ottoman Empire, the UK saw to it that the vilayet [province] of Mosul, inhabited not by Arabs but by Kurdish Muslims , Assyrian Christians, Jews and smaller ethno-religious groups, be transferred to the new, British-sponsored Kingdom of Iraq and taken away from the new Turkish Republic. Some say that this was because oil had been discovered in and around the city of Mosul, which would be more under British influence as a part of Iraq --then under a British mandate-- than as a part of Turkey. In Iraq, the British winked at the massacre of thousands of Assyrians in 1933 at the hands of the Iraqi Arab army.

During WW2, the UK violated its mandate to foster development of the Jewish National Home by severely limiting the number of Jews to be allowed to immigrate into the Jewish National Home when the Jews most needed a home. This was the notorious 1939 White Paper policy. More generally, UK foreign minister Anthony Eden came out in support of pan-Arab nationalism by calling for formation of what became the Arab League. Eden's speech came on 29 May 1941, just three days before the notorious pro-Nazi pogrom against Jews in Baghdad [1 & 2 June 1941]. Hence, it would have been only natural for Eden to keep British troops outside Baghdad at that time from intervening to stop the massacre of the Jews. Be that as it may, British troops there at that time did not intervene.

When the Jewish underground in Israel was fighting for independence and to have the UK let Jewish Holocaust survivors into the country, the UK continued to refuse to honor its commitments under the mandate. Although Pres. Truman had called for 100,000 Jewish Holocaust survivors to be allowed into Israel by the UK in 1946, by 1947 the US State Dept and other USGovt agencies were encouraging the Arab war effort against the as yet unborn Israel. Here the US slipped into the role of continuing the British anti-Jewish, pro-Arab, pro-Muslim policy.
The UK in Israel supported Arab forces against the Jews, fighting the Jews directly in Yafo [Jaffa] and in Jerusalem.

In 1952, British and US operatives encouraged and helped Nasser and his pro-Hitlerite "Free Officers" to overthrow the parliamentary monarchy of King Farouq. Mubarak belonged to the regime put in place by Nasser and the "Free Officers" in 1952. In that year, American mainstream publications celebrated the fall of King Farouq by explaining that the rebels were against Farouq's "corruption." In Iraq, in the 1960s and 1970s, the USA supported the Arab national socialist Ba`ath Party, the crowning glory of which was Saddam Hussein. After Israeli aircraft had destroyed the Iraqi Osirak atomic development facility [1981], the US administration wanted to denounce Israel for this defensive action, although it did not because public opinion was with Israel. The US also formally "recognized" the PLO in November 1988, although high level contacts with the PLO had gone on for decades.

In early 1979, the Carter Administration --its foreign policy directed by the Sorcerer's Apprentice, Zbigniew Brzezinski-- helped the Islamist fanatic Ayatollah Khomeini, take over Iran. Was Zbig unaware of Khomeini's fanaticism and bigotry? It was no secret to specialists on Iran at that time where Khomeini stood. Likewise, James Clapper, Obama's director of national intelligence [Intelligence?], knows where the Muslim Brotherhood stands and pretended it was something else. Interestingly, Zbigniew Brzezinski, Carter's national insecurity advisor has also been an advisor to Obama. Zbig's grand theory was and --apparently-- still is to build up Islamic fanaticism. No doubt in pursuit of this purpose, Obama sent Zbig to Damascus in February 2008, months before his election. Zbig was probably supposed to tell Junior Assad that if Obama were elected, then the Assads would have a friend in the White House. The fact that Damascus and Assad's very own mouth are world centers of Judeophobic agitprop and hate indoctrination, did not deter either Zbig or Obama.

These facts among others are the background to Obama administration efforts to put the Muslim Brotherhood in power in Egypt. I think that the disciples of Zbig succeeded all too well in Iran. We don't need another Khomeini, this time in Egypt. But stopping Obama's goal from being realized needs constant criticism of Obama for the dangerous course that he is taking.

Sources
Mitchell Bard, The Arab Lobby (New York: Harper Collins 2010) [a lengthy excerpt is found here]
Isaiah Friedman, British Pan-Arab Policy, 1915-1922 (2009) [see synopsis here & here]
Martin Gilbert, Exile and Return (London 1978)
George Horton, The Blight of Asia [Horton was the US consul in Smyrna in 1922]
Marjorie Housepian, The Smyrna Affair
Lord Kinross, Ataturk; A Biography of Mustafa Kemal (1965)
Richard Meinertzhagen, Middle East Diary
Jacques de Morgan, The History of the Armenian People (Boston: Hairenik Press 1918)
Horace Samuel, Revolt by Leave (London)
E K Sarkisian & R G Sahakian, Vital Issues in Modern Armenian History (Watertown, MA: Armenian Studies 1965)
Shlomo Slonim, "The 1948 American Embargo on Arms to Palestine," Political Science Quarterly, (Fall 1979)
Bernard Wasserstein, Britain and the Jews of Europe, 1939-1945.
_ _ _ _ _ _. The British in Palestine: The Mandatory Government and the Arab-Jewish Conflict 1917-1929. (British Historical Society)
Meir Zamir [see several online articles by Zamir on British policy in the 1944 to 1948 period in HaArets & Jerusalem Post]
William Ziff, The Rape of Palestine

- - - - - -
One Jerusalem on the changes in Egypt [includes link to Victor David Hanson].
2-24-2011 At least one mainstream journalist, Arnaud de Borchgrave, talks common sense about the Muslim Brotherhood. If he could only get the ears of Obama, Hilary, James Clapper, and the other fantasy mongers in the Administration [here]
Another MSM journalist, Jeffrey Goldberg, also gives helpful info about the MB's hatred of Jews, specifically Qaradawi's explanation that Muslim hatred of Jews is rooted in Islam and that Muslims must kill all Jews before Judgment Day can come [here]. For those unfamiliar with Islamic lore, this article demonstrates that hatred for Israel is rooted in Islam's hatred for Jews and has nothing especially to do with "settlements" or "occupation."

Labels: , , , , , , , ,

Wednesday, May 10, 2006

More on the BBC and the Holocaust

We have already considered the BBC's reluctance to report the ongoing Holocaust in 1942 in the same period of time as the BBC's masters at the British Foreign Office were very concerned to have the Arab states work for Arab unity. That is, it was Foreign Secretary, Anthony Eden, who pushed the Arabs to set up the Arab League. The Iraqi Nuri al-Sa`id who presented his plan for the Arab League to the British was known as a British loyalist among the Arab politicians.

In the same general period, the BBC was reluctant to report the Holocaust, and only did so very sparingly, see here, here, here, and here. Nor did the British --or other major Allied powers-- help the Jews subject to the Nazi extermination program in any practical or concrete way.

Zigelboym wrote in his letter of 17 December 1942 to his Bund colleague in New York:

The British expert on Poland showed me his expert opinion which he had submitted to Eden [Anthony Eden], in which he explained the killing of all Warsaw Jews as officially proven, the extermination of [the Jews in] all other cities [in Poland] -- as apparently true, but not officially proven. The issue of a declaration by the governments [in exile in London] had budged from its place.

A week after the negative directive to the British radio [BBC], an opposite directive came. And it was not a secret one, as my friend gave it to me to read. Its content was about like this: Up till today Hitler has successfully used antisemitism for his purposes. Now, the day has come when we can use his antisemitism against him. Therefore, we must widely spread news of the anti-Jewish massacres in Poland. [Zigelboym Bukh, p 359]
Then, the director of the BBC invited me to a new conference. He spoke with me about which passages in our report (from the underground Bund in Poland), as well as in the Polish government reports, that we should give maximal attention to on the radio. He proposed to me that I give an English speech of six minutes --as the direct representative of those being slaughtered. This was on the 11th of December. I gave the talk on the 13th of December (Sunday) at 10 in the morning. It made, as my English acquaintances told me, a strong impression. Excerpts from it were repeated throughout the day on all broadcasts. [pp 359-360]
Speaking to the Board of Deputies of British Jews, Zigelboym said, rejecting proposals for a day of fasting and a week of mourning:
It is your duty to do something that should really shake the world, the English government, and force it to undertake real measures to save the Jews, something that the Warsaw Jews would do if the situation were reversed [i.e., persecution of Jews in the UK]. 50,000 London Jews should make a demonstration, they should block Downing Street; they should shout to Heaven in such a way that it will shake the world and the tranquillity of the politicians, who potentially can do something. It is the last minute. The Jewish people is being slaughtered. [p 360]
I accepted the invitation of the Propaganda Department of the Labour Party to a number of mass meetings of the English working class throughout the country on the theme of the massacres of Jews. I have already made many appearances before English trade unions and local organizations giving lectures. In the first days of January there are two such meetings --one in a London suburb, the second -- in the coal region before coal-miners. At the same time, I have been informed that the Polish Pen Club is making an effort for a special meeting of the English and other Pen Clubs, which are here, at which I am to appear. [Zigelboym Bukh, Letter to the New York Bund delegate of 17 December 1942; pp360-361]
Despite all this activity, all these appearances, Zigelboym wrote on January 1, 1943:
Our actions and protests have no practical value. I shudder when it becomes clear to me that in July, when I here and you there [in New York] made a great noise around the first report of slaughters in eastern Poland, which had taken place in the Spring, and we thought that we were doing our duty and our best to save the Jews from further massacres. . . [yet] at the same time the great massacres in Warsaw. . . [were going on as we protested the previous massacres]. . . We are not capable, I am not capable of doing anything to save even one person, one Jewish child, from a horrendous death. . . [Zigelboym Bukh, Letter to Bund delegate in New York of 1 January 1943; pp361-362]
Later that year, as the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising was proceeding without Allied help, except from a few Poles like Henryk Iwanski, Zigelboym wrote:
On May 1, I spoke on the radio [BBC] for home [for Poland]. . . [Letter of 3 May 1943; p 363]
That is, the BBC allowed him to speak on a broadcast to Poland in Polish [as far as I know, the BBC did not have Yiddish-language broadcasts, nor did it want them], not to a British audience, whereas only British public opinion could have changed British policy.

Neither the British government nor any other major Allied power did anything concrete to oppose, impede, stop, hinder, or hamper the Holocaust in Poland. Zigelboym was allowed to make appearances on the BBC starting in December 1942, but it appears that all his appearances were only granted to him by the BBC for the sake of appearances. That is, so that the BBC would be seen to be doing its duty to humanity, although nothing concrete or meaningful was being done by the British government, of which the BBC was --and is-- an agency. In 1942-1943, the British government must have felt that Zigelboym had to be placated too, since he was a person of some standing and consequence, as an official of the Polish Government-in-exile and a trade union leader with ties to British trade unions as well. So they made a few gestures towards him, but nothing concrete was done.

Today, Arab collaboration in the Holocaust --most strikingly throughHaj Amin el-Husseini, the British-appointed Mufti of Jerusalem-- is forgotten. Meanwhile, the UK government fawns over the self-avowed genocidist Ahmadinejad, an Iranian Islamic supremacist. He declares his desire to destroy Israel, the Jews who survived the Holocaust. The UK is not alone today. Most European Union states are eager to fawn and grovel over the IslamoNazis. As an example, the UK and the rest of the EU know that mass murder is being perpetrated by Arabs/Muslims in Sudan, yet nothing is done to stop it. Nor would any serious person expect the UN to do anything. Mass murder perpetrated by the Islamic/Arab nationalist regimes in the Sudan has been going on since Sudan became independent on 1 January 1956. Nothing concrete was ever done to stop it. Mass murder has been and is the order of the day. And the university teachers' union in Britain calls for a boycott of Israel [announced 9 May]. So the Nazis run the academy. Just as Hitler had his professors, so too Abu Mazen and Ahmadinejad and Bashar Assad and Bin Laden have their professors, eager to grovel and foam at the mouth on cue like Pavlov's dog, dogs who can be siccked onto the nation of Israel, giving vent to their ignorant hatred [What else would one expect from professors?]. Further pro-Nazi influence in the British universities is provided by one Chris Patten, formerly an EU foreign policy official, now one of the top guns at Cambridge or Oxford, the jewels in the crown of British scholarship. But no action is taken by the British academics on behalf of the those suffering in Sudan. Not even a call for a boycott.

- - - - - - - -
Coming soon: massacre of Assyrians in Iraq, pogrom against Jews in Bagdad [with British collaboration], etc.

Labels: , , , ,