Kate´s Playground Free Movie

History of Israel # 8 - The Six Day War

tanks in the Golan Heights, 1967.

of Andrea Pili

Previously
1. Zionism and theft of Palestinian territories
2. The Great Arab Revolt
3. Jewish Terrorism
4. The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine

5. The first Arab-Israeli war

6.1. La seconda guerra arabo-israeliana (1^parte)

6.2. La seconda guerra arabo-israeliana (2^parte)

7. Nascita di Al Fatah e dell'Olp

Re Hussein di Giordania assieme a Nasser.

Tra la fine del 1966 e i primi cinque mesi del 1967 la tensione mediorientale salì enormemente fino allo scoppio dell'inevitabile conflitto. A tale situazione si unì l'ansia del presidente Nasser, il quale - dopo recenti fallimenti politici e l'ascesa di nuovi soggetti politici – vuole ribadire il suo ruolo nella questione del Medio Oriente.

Gli attacchi della guerriglia palestinese divennero minacciosi ed il governo israeliano decise di rispondere con delle rappresaglie in territori non propri: nel novembre 1966 l'esercito sionista attaccò il villaggio di As-Samu in Giordania, mentre nell'aprile 1967 terrorizzò il Sinai, in Egitto. Nel maggio dello stesso anno si moltiplicarono gli incidenti militari aerei tra Siria e Israele; Nasser allora entrò in scena ottenendo il ritiro delle truppe UNEF (19 maggio) e successivamente chiudendo gli stretti di Tiran e quindi bloccando le navi dirette verso Israele. Il 26 maggio il presidente egiziano pronunciò un discorso acceso contro l'esistenza dello stato sionista e quattro giorni dopo stipula un Pact military alliance with Jordan also joined in and soon Iraq. [1] The Hashemite monarch proved to be an opportunist on this occasion: not until February 1967 he signed an agreement with the USA to protect their kingdom, but the nationalist opposition under pressure immediately after Hussein and gabbana ago pretending to be pro-Palestinian agreeing with Nasser. Meanwhile, as Israel mobilized its army, France is the first foreign power to the region that senses the war in advance. De Gaulle then stopped the shipment of arms to the Middle East, and then tried to set up a conference with Great Britain, USA and the USSR to avoid the conflict, but the Soviet Union reaffirmed its support for the Arab side and the conference was aborted.

On June 5, 1967, the Zionist government of Levi Eshkol announced the outbreak of hostilities by sending aircraft to bomb the Arab air bases, in Israel a few hours becomes absolute master of the air had destroyed almost all the media aero -Military of Egypt, Jordan, Syria and Iraq. The Chief of Staff Yitzhak Rabin ordered his armored troops to invade the Sinai Peninsula in Egypt also the Jewish soldiers have been sweeping over the Arab armies and even reaching the east bank of the Suez Canal and occupy Sharm el-Sheikh. The Egyptian front is now weakened, since 6 hours all'8 giugno Israele inizia l'offensiva in Cisgiordania con lo stesso copione: i giordani vennero travolti e furono subito costretti a ritirarsi per difendere la capitale Amman, lasciando mano libera alle truppe che l'8 giugno occupano tutta Gerusalemme.

Lo stesso giorno i paesi arabi proclamarono il “cessate il fuoco” ma Israele vuole continuare il conflitto per chiudere i conti anche con la Siria. Tra il 9 e il 10 giugno l'esercito di Rabin combatte sull'altipiano presso il lago di Tiberiade e occupa El Quneistra e le alture del Golan. Il fallimento arabo è totale; il 10 giugno l'offensiva israeliana si blocca a seguito del richiamo del Consiglio di Sicurezza dell'Onu.

Narkiss, Dayan and Rabin entrants in the Old City of Jerusalem

after the defeat of Jordanians.

The new Nakba

The effects of the Six Day War in the sensitivity of the Arab world are comparable to those of Nakba of 1948 for humiliation and for the new mass of refugees caused by 'Israeli arrogance. The Israeli territory extended from 22,000 to over 100,000 square kilometers and the Arabs under his rule grew from 200,000 to over one million.

On 28 June 1967, the Knesset approved the admission to the territory of Israel in Jerusalem, the Sinai and the Golan Heights, the area constitutes the so-called "occupied territories" in which a military administration takes office, in East Jerusalem is already starting the construction of Jewish neighborhoods. From 29 August to 1 September, the Arab League met in Khartoum and said he did not recognize the state of Israel, therefore, with the Zionists will not enter into any peace. On 22 November the UN Security Council condemns the Zionist acquisition of Arab territories, Resolution 242 is to give notice to withdraw from areas invaded Israel and calls on all states in the region to respect the independence and sovereignty of borders approved, also calls for a fair solution to the problem of Palestinian refugees and freedom of navigation.

Clearly Israel did not respect the resolution but was in fact very active in the implementation of colonialism and the harassment of Arab citizens: in the Occupied Territories were forbidden to print and Arabic art, trade unions were repressed, protests and strikes are thwarted by the intervention Zionist police. Meanwhile, are swelling the ranks of the refugees because of the new exodus: Jordan found himself with no less than 722,687 refugees (500,000 of them outside the camps), 160,723 in Lebanon, in Syria 144,390 (including 23,000 outside the camps) .

Colonialism in the West Bank

The West Bank is the most suitable of the Israeli colonialist policy and felt the hard way the subtle political maneuver that took advantage of a war started with the legitimate reasons to restore the freedom of navigation in a war of imperialist occupation. The West Bank was one of the richest lands of the Kingdom of Jordan, with an agro-pastoral guarantor not only of self but also that export fruits and vegetables and dairy products in the Arab market, after 1967 was imposed in an economy serves the interests of Zionists favor of the industrial crops of tobacco and cotton for the Israeli market. But the government of Israel is also famous for its willingness to harm the Arab agricultural development and this is manifested in the control of water resources and the diversion of water to Israel to improve the irrigation of crops Jewish. It is estimated that in the '80s as much as 40% of water consumption of Israel came from the West Bank. The Palestinians did not stay more than an army of unemployed Jews at the mercy of masters who could take advantage of their low cost. So Israel, rhetorically justified by the Holocaust shows that he has inspired to improve the policies of his former captors as a capacity to destroy a people and also to the presumption of power and duty to act in the face of all compliance of sovereignty and international standards. To see the end of Israeli military occupation in the West Bank have to wait until 1994.

Notes [1] It provided for the establishment of a pan-Arab army under the command of Egyptian un'ufficiale.

Bibliography
Codovini John, "History of the Arab-Israeli Palestinian
Various Authors," Larousse Encyclopedia Peruzzo, "
Ghassan Kanafani," The Great Arab Revolt (1936-1939) "
Ilan Pappe , "The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine" Roberto
Gremmi, "Judaism armed"


sitography
Suez 1956, the challenge of Egypt. We are History.
http://www.newjerseysolidarity.org/resources/roots/chapter11.html
http://english.aljazeera.net/photo_galleries/middleeast/2010831121213978340.html

North Face Denali,cancer

midterm elections: Obama loses points, but in America is different

not always the whole world is country. We are told that Obama is not going badly and that the midterm elections have certainly not improved the situation as already predicted by the polls. All true, but it should be noted that the U.S. Constitution is not equal to the Italian, and generally has important differences in all European constitutions.

First, the midterm elections are not a true picture of public opinion, let alone can serve as a yardstick of the agreement reserved to the President. This is because there is no proportional representation, in America you do not vote the party but never the individual candidate. This allows you to have a policy that rewards those who bring serious ideas and want to bump for them, because we will see the end. Suppose that X has been on duty for the renewal of one third of the Senate in midterm elections this year. This was the union must give two senators, the state X with a majority of votes for the Democratic Party, but has two Republican senators. No matter how many votes in fact take the list as a whole (as would be the proportional vote) to get the seat will be the two most voted candidates. Suppose there are 20 candidates. Democrats get 11 votes each in 1000, seven of the Republicans get 900 votes each, two other Republicans get instead 1001 votes each. Taking the sum we get 11,000 votes to 8,302 votes for the Democrats and the Republicans.

Obama's party in the state of their opponents well beyond X 2698 votes, if they were presidential elections this state would be counted as one of those who voted in favor of Obama. In the presidential elections because there are states. Instead there are two Senate Republicans who have been awarded to more than one vote to scrap all the possible Democratic candidates.

In the U.S. political system is certainly driven by the parties, but these have a weight significantly different from those in Europe, the X in the state Republican Party has had to rely on two strong candidates, oppure hanno saputo farsi appoggiare dalle lobby giuste, le quali a sua volta trovano molto più conveniente investire su singoli candidati, che non su interi apparati di partito. Da un lato il sistema nominale permette ai singoli dotati di idee nuove di andare avanti senza essere pugnalati alla schiena dagli apparati. Per inciso può anche capitare che il candidato di una lista civica minoritaria, non sostenuto da nessun partito, ottenga il seggio mandando a casa i candidati dei due partiti certamente maggioritari nello stato X: democratico e repubblicano. Dall’altro lato questo sistema è penetrabile dalle lobby d’affari, che in questo modo possono, attraverso campagne mediatiche, far vincere candidati che non rispecchiano affatto la volontà popolare, ma solo gli interessi economici di pochi.

In quest’ottica la notizia della “sconfitta” di Obama alle elezioni di medio termine si apre ad interpretazioni più profonde. Senza fare dell’attuale presidente un santino consideriamo un attimo quanti interessi ci sono in campo: le corporation delle armi vedranno ridotte le loro commesse in Iraq; le società di assicurazione sanitaria non potranno più fare quel che gli pare e nel mercato finanziario si vogliono ripristinare i paletti che limiteranno le speculazioni finanziarie; poi c’è il Tea Party dei Conservatori, l’ala più reazionaria del partito repubblicano: una fucina di idee che ogni giorno forma nuovi singoli candidati with new slogans and alternative ideas, and so on. We have a lobbying and conservative intellectuals, committed to regaining control of Congress. No wonder we have been successful, exploiting the fact that the changes Obama wants to introduce a law-socio-anthropological-cause more resistance in people.

However, even gaining control of Congress, Republicans will have to deal with other aspects of the U.S. Constitution that the media have explained our own there. Typically, the legislation has the House of Representatives, the Senate has more limited purpose. Let's say it passes a law proposed by Republicans aimed at restoring the domain of the private sector in American health care. A number of democratic representatives may table a motion against the law and with the signing of a senator, that law must be passed to the Senate where traditionally there are no agendas, is the sole arbiter of the President ' assembly, but this post is for the U.S. Vice President, that is, institutionally speaking-glove with the head of state. There being no strict rules, an agenda they obstruction is considered a practical rather than honorable, on behalf of the democratic principle according to which even those who represent a minority must be able to hear his voice. There have been extreme cases of senators che hanno tenuto parola per ben 24 ore di fila! Impedendo così che una legge a loro sgradita venisse approvata.

Supponiamo che in tal giorno al Senato tutti i senatori “obamiani” abbiano la raucedine. A quel punto la legge passa. Non fa niente, perché Obama può esercitare il suo diritto di veto, che è diverso dal veto che può esercitare il presidente della repubblica italiana. Secondo la Costituzione Usa infatti, al veto presidenziale deve seguire una nuova votazione, stavolta di entrambe le camere e la legge passa solo con una maggioranza dei due terzi in entrambe. Inutile dirvi che difficilmente i repubblicani potranno ottenere così tanti seggi, a meno che non riescano per loro le lobby a comprarsi some sniper. This would be facilitated by the fact that in America the committees are open to representatives of multinational companies and banks. But a two-thirds majority in both chambers is something rare and unique ... a member of the American coast!

So if you do not get the necessary votes the law will no longer be put back on to the next legislation. Not to mention that, because of these mechanisms, by tradition the president is the first legislature, which is usually in the Congress are discussed mainly the bills of the government. To say that Obama is weak I seem exaggerated, at least you should explain in which it is. As I understand the polls are more believable than a mid-term elections, we also consider the fact that presidents of a party that is dominant in the Congress found that opponents were always there and this has not prevented them from being re-elected. The worrying thing in this whole story is that on the one hand are not about the important role that the lobbyists and extremist groups like the Tea Party had in elections to the Congress, we do believe with the other omissions-willed and not-in America how things work in Europe, if not in Italy, preventing us from having a clear picture of what really happens. I am not surprised at this point, check that the conservative media in the U.S. have already usato questi “taglia e cuci” per far credere di essere popolari. Gente che non vuole le riforme, perché teme di dover fare la fila come i comuni mortali all’ospedale, e chiama tutto ciò che concerne il welfare, comunismo.