The British were in charge of the Mandate for
Palestine, which was supposed to allow the Arabs and
Jews to live side by side.
After awhile, under Arab pressure the British started
the White Paper policy which restricting immigration
and acquisition of land by Jews, which caused the
deaths of thousands of Jews.
At the end of WWII the British said they'd consider a
Jewish state but quickly changed their minds and went
back to enforcing the White Paper.
The bombing was retaliation for Black Sabbath when the
British arrested 2700 Jews believed to be involved in
anti-British activities.
The King David Hotel was a Jewish hotel taken over by
the British and turned into a military command center.
There were three phone calls warning of the bombing
before hand and all were ignored.
The Hotel was supposed to be evacuated but wasn't.
On top of that the Bombing was July 22, 1946. The
British left in May 1948.
So saying that British promptly left after the bombing
is just wrong.
-sm
--- "Larry C. Lyons" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Gus,
>
> The Israelis did not start a terrorist campaign to
> get independence.
> The British had already announced that they were
> turning over
> Palestine to the UN for resolution well before the
> formation of the
> Stern Gang or Irgun. The campaign waged by those two
> groups (the Stern
> Gang's leadership included btw former Israeli PM
> Begin) was intended
> to accellerate the withdrawal of British forces.
>
> Also it was not WW2, Britian had control of
> Palestine since 1918 with
> the formalization of the Versailles treaty and the
> withdrawal of
> Ottoman Turk forces in 1917. Palestine was
> officially assigned to the
> British as a protectorate in 1920 or 1922 - forget
> which.
>
>
> larry
>
>
> On Mon, 11 Oct 2004 13:20:58 -0500, Gruss Gott
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Mon, 11 Oct 2004, G
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > I get the feeling that if the current excuse was
> removed, another would take its' place.
> >
> > There's only ever been one reason - US foreign
> policy that favors one
> > terrorist over another: The Shah over the clerics;
> Iraq over Iranian
> > clerics, Saudi Arabia over Iraq, Israel over
> Palestine.
> >
> > The problem started with implicit US support of
> the jewish terrorist
> > organization, The Irgun. After WWII, Britian was
> put in charge of
> > Palestine who had supported the Axis during the
> war. The Jews,
> > however, thought that the region was due to them
> and began a terrorist
> > campaign against the British to get it.
> >
> > After numerous attacks and disruptions the Irgun
> had their coup. They
> > hijacked a milk truck, killed it's Palestinian
> driver, filled it full
> > of explosives and detonated it in a hotel many
> British soldiers were
> > bunked at.
> >
> > The blast killed about 30 British soldiers and 70
> others. Britain
> > prompted pulled out of the region leaving the
> Irgun with the country.
> > The Irgun's leader, Menahem Begin, eventually
> became the Prime
> > Minister of Israel.
> >
> > To Arabs the lesson was, if you conduct a
> terrorist campaign against
> > the occupiers they'll pull out and you'll get the
> country. This has
> > been the policy, on the whole, that Arabs have
> pursued ever since.
> >
> > This began to change in the mid-ninties with
> President Clinton who
> > negotiated for peace in both Palestine and
> Northern Ireland. The Arab
> > view of the US began to grow favorable and spiked
> when al Qaeda
> > attacked the US.
> >
> > The unilateral dismissal of the UN and invasion of
> Iraq, however, has
> > probably pitted an entire generation of Arabs
> against us.
> >
> >
>
>
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
