Jewish American Heritage Month

Posted By richards on September 13, 2015

by Rebecca Weiner

The descendants of Jews who left Spain or Portugal after the 1492 expulsion are referred to as Sephardim. The word Sephardim comes from the Hebrew word for Spain, Sepharad, that is stated in the Bible.

It is believed that Jews have lived in Spain since the era of King Solomon (c.965-930 B.C.E.). Little information can be found on these Jews until the beginning of the first century. We do know that in 305 C.E., the Council of Toledo passed an edict forbidding Jews from blessing the crops of non-Jews and prohibiting Jews and non-Jews from eating together.

- Visigoth Rule - The Golden Age - Christian Rule, Inquisition & Expulsion - Exiled Sephardic Communities - World War II-Present - Language - Religious Practices

In 409 C.E., the Visigoths conquered Spain. The Visigoths were Arian Christians, followers of Arius who reasoned that Jesus could not logically co-exist with God and must therefore be subservient to him.

In 587 C.E., King Reccared, the Visigoth king in Spain, converted to Roman Catholicism and made it the state religion. Subsequently, the Church was to exert powerful influence on all aspects of social life. Almost immediately, in 589 C.E., a canon was passed forbidding the marriage between Christians and Jews; and in 612 C.E., the Council of Gundemar of Toledo ordered that all Jews submit to baptism within the year.

In 638 C.E., the Arian Visigoths declared that only Catholics could live in Spain.

The situation improved in 711 when Spain fell under the rule of the Muslim Moors. Both Muslims and Jews built a civilization, based in Cordoba, known as Al-Andalus, which was more advanced than any civilization in Europe at that time. Jews were able to coexist peacefully with their neighbors; however, they were still treated as dhimmis, "People of the Book" (Jews and Christians) who are protected under Islamic law. Jews did not have complete autonomy and had to pay a special tax, the jizha , but were able to freely practice their religion.

The era of Muslim rule in Spain (8th-11th century) was considered the "Golden Age" for Spanish Jewry. Jewish intellectual and spiritual life flourished and many Jews served in Spanish courts. Jewish economic expansion was unparalleled. In Toledo, Jews were involved in translating Arabic texts to the romance languages, as well as translating Greek and Hebrew texts into Arabic. Jews also contributed to botany, geography, medicine, mathematics, poetry and philosophy.

A number of well-known Jewish physicians practiced during this period, including Hasdai Ibn Shaprut (915-970), who was the doctor for the Caliph (leader of Spain). Many famous Jewish figures lived during the Golden Age and contributed to making this a flourishing period for Jewish thought. These included Samuel Ha-Nagid, Moses ibn Ezra, Solomon ibn Gabirol Judah Halevi and Moses Maimonides.

Jews lived separately in aljamas (Jewish quarters). They were given administrative control over their communities and managed their own communal affairs. Jews had their own court system, known as the Bet Din. Rabbis served as judges and rendered both religious and civil legal opinions.

Islamic culture also influenced the Jews. Muslim and Jewish customs and practices became intertwined. For example, Arabic was used for prayers rather than Hebrew or Spanish. Before entering the synagogue, Jews washed their hands and feet, which is a practice done before entering a mosque. Arab melodies were used for Jewish songs. Jews wore the clothing style of their Moorish neighbors, although they were not allowed to wear silk or furs.

Jews lived peacefully in Al-Andulus for 400 years. The Golden Age for Jewry in Muslim Spain declined after the Almovarids gained power in 1055 and continued to deteriorate after the Almohads came to power in 1147. Jews continued to work as moneylenders, jewelers, cobblers, tailors and tanners, however, they had to wear distinguishing clothing, such as a yellow turban.

The Christians conquered Toledo in 1098 and the Jews in Christian Spain prospered, while those in Muslim Spain suffered under the Almohad dynasty. Both Jews and Muslims were involved in the cultural, economic, intellectual, financial and political life of Christian Spain. By the mid-13th century, the Christians controlled most of Spain and increasingly forced Jews to convert to Christianity. Those who converted became known as Marranos or New Christians. Marranos are also known as crypto-Jews because they taught their children and practiced Judaism in secret. During this period, Jews were forced to participate in "religious" disputes with Christians counterparts.

Anti-Jewish riots broke out in 1391 in several Spanish cities and the situation worsened for the Jewish community. New Christians were tortured or killed in the Spanish Inquisition during the 15th century. Father Tomas de Torquemada felt that if the Jews remained in Spain, then they would influence the new converts to Christianity. After the capture of Granada from Muslim forces, Father Torquemada convinced King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella that the Jewish community was expendable. In 1492, Isabella and Ferdinand commanded that all Jews who refused to convert to Christianity be expelled from Spain. The Jews were given four months to leave Spain and were forced to sell their houses and businesses at low prices. It is estimated that 100,000 Jews left Spain at this time. The expulsion from Spain is commemorated every year by all Jews on the holiday of Tisha BAv.

Many Spanish Jews settled in Portugal, which allowed the practice of Judaism. In 1497, however, Portugal also expelled its Jews. King Manuel of Portugal agreed to marry the daughter of Spains monarchs. One of the conditions for the marriage was the expulsion of Portugals Jewish community. In actuality only eight Jews were exiled from Portugal and the rest converted, under duress, to Christianity.

In the first Sephardi Diaspora, a large number of Jews settled in North Africa and in the Ottoman Empire, especially, Turkey and Greece. Spanish exiles brought with them a unique culture, language (Ladino) and traditions. Many of these immigrants continued to speak Ladino until the 20th century.

A Marrano Diaspora took place a century later. Some Marranos had settled in Portugal and eventually moved to Holland, where they were allowed to outwardly practice Judaism. Many settled in Western Europe and moved to the Americas. Marranos who settled in Latin America continued practicing crypto-Judaism for many years because Spain began an inquisition in its New World colonies. Fear of persecution led Crypto-Jews to settle in remote villages. Today, descendants of crypto-Jews can be found in Colorado and New Mexico.

Europe

Large Sephardic communities were founded in Venice, Leghorn, London, Bordeaux, Bayonne and Hamburg. These immigrants spoke Portugese and Spanish and many adapted mainstream Western European culture. Successful business enterprises were started by the Sephardim and their trade networks became famous worldwide.

Throughout the medieval period in Europe, the Sephardic Jews were treated as elites among Jews. Many times they had a secular education and often had great wealth. In the 18th century, the Sephardic Jews who lived in Amsterdam and in London, tended to discriminate against non-Sephardic Jews who wanted to pray at their synagogues by forcing them to sit separately from the rest of the congregation.

North Africa and the Arab World

For hundreds of years, Sephardic Jews lived, as dhimmis, in relative peace with Muslim neighbors and rulers in North Africa and in the Ottoman Empire. They were considered second-class citizens, but were free to practice their own religion and participate in commerce. Similar to Spain and Portugal during the Golden Era, the Sephardic upper class in the Ottoman empire were employed as translators.

The Sephardic communities in the Arab world were more receptive to modernity than their Ashkenazi counterparts in Europe. The Zionist movement became popular among Sephardic Jews in North Africa. Many Sephardic rabbis in the Ottoman Empire supported Zionism and the Zionist movement spread to many Muslim countries in North Africa, such as in Egypt and Tunisia.

In World War II, Sephardim in Europe suffered the same fate as other Jews, and most perished during the Holocaust. In a few places, such as Holland, they received some preferential treatment, meaning they were among the last to be liquidated.

After the establishment of the State of Israel, conditions for Jews in many Islamic countries grew increasingly uncomfortable and, in some cases, their lives were threatened. In the 1950's and 1960's, tens of thousands of Sephardic Jews fled from North Africa and other countries in the Middle East to settle in Israel, usually being forced by the Muslim authorities to leave behind most of their worldly possessions. Once they came to Israel, most of the Sephardic immigrants were put in transit camps and became dependent on welfare. The conditions in these camps were very bad and it was difficult for the newcomers to work their way out of the lower rung of Israeli society because they had less education than the established Ashkenazic community. Consequently, many worked in blue-collar professions.

Today, tensions remain between Ashkenazim and Sephardim in Israel because of the poor treatment the latter received and the long, difficult road Sephardic Jews have had to travel to approach parity in society. Though they have not yet achieved equality, Sephardic Jews increasingly occupy positions of prestige and influence. Moroccan-born David Levy, for example, has served as foreign minister and, in July 2000, Iranian-born Moshe Katsav was elected president.

Besides Israel, other large Sephardic communities developed in Central and South America, Rhodesia and the Belgian Congo. Meanwhile, the existing communities in New York, Paris and London grew. One of the most famous Sephardic synagogues is Congregation Shearith Israel, the first Jewish congregation in North America, and the only Jewish congregation in New York from its founding in 1654 until 1825.

The Sephardi Jews preserved their special language, which was a combination of Hebrew and Spanish, known as Ladino. Ladino is still spoken by some Sephardic communities, such as those in Greece, Turkey, Bulgaria, Rumania, France and Latin America. Today the largest Ladino-speaking community can be found in Israel. One can also read Ladino in Sephardic literature.

When Jews left Spain and Portugal they continued to speak Ladino, in the same grammar and vocabulary of 14th and 15th century Spanish. The Sephardic exile communities of Amsterdam, London and Italy were still in contact with Spain and hence they continued to speak Castillian Spanish.

Exile communities in the Ottoman Empire, however, retained the 14th and 15th century Spanish and borrowed words from Hebrew, Arabic Greek, Turkish and French and diverged considerably from Castillian Spanish. There are many different Ladino dialects. An Oriental Ladino was used in Turkey and Rhodes, while a Western Ladino was spoken in Greece, Macedonia, Bosnia, Serbia and Rumania.

Ladino is written using Hebrew letters and often uses the Rashi script. In fact, Rashi script was originally a Ladino script; however, after Rashis death, this script was used to differentiate his commentary from others ones. More recently, in the 20th century, Ladino has been written using the Latin alphabet.

Sephardic and Ashkenazi Jews share the same tenets of Judaism, follow the Babylonian Talmud and the Shulkhan Arukh. Differences arise in customs and in liturgy. For example, on Passover, Sephardic Jews eat kitnyot, rice and corn products. Also, at many Sephardic sedars, the father will reenact the experience of gaining freedom by circling the sedar table and holding a symbolic bag over his shoulder.

Other differences exist in the way Sephardic Jews wind their tefillin straps outwards, whereas Ashkenazi Jews wind the tefillin inwards. Sephardic grooms are honored with an aliyah to the Torah on the Shabbat after their wedding, whereas Ashkenazi grooms are called up to the Torah the Shabbat before the wedding.

Sephardic Torah scrolls are usually stored in a large wooden cylinder, which stands erect when opened. The parchment is in an upright position when read, whereas, Ashkenazi scrolls just have an embroidered cover and the scrolls are read while lying flat on a table.

Sephardic liturgy uses the same basic prayers, but add different psalms and poems. The prayer, Ein Keloyheinu, is recited at the Saturday morning services for both Sephardic and Ashkenazic Jews, however, it is also read daily by Sephardic Jews. Sephardim also use a different cantillation for reading the Torah and different melodies for prayers. All Sephardic synagogues are traditional, women are seated separately, typically in a balcony.

Sources: Congregation Shearith Israel Golden Age of Spain. Sephardic Adventure. Marks, Scott Alfassa. "The Jews in Islamic Spain." Sephardic House. Sephardim. Encyclopedia Judaica. CD -Rom Edition 1995. The Sephardim or Spanish Jews Stillman, Norman A. The Jews of Arab Lands in Modern Times. The Jewish Publication Society of America. 1991. Telushkin, Rabbi Joseph. Jewish Literacy: The Most Important Things to Know About the Jewish Religion, Its People and Its History. William Morrow and Company, Inc. 1991. Ward, Seth Dr. Sephardim and Crypto-Judaism: Definition of Terms and Brief History

Visit link:
Sephardim | Jewish Virtual Library

Category: Sephardic | Comments Off on Sephardim | Jewish Virtual Library
Tags:

Posted By simmons on September 12, 2015

One of the many photographs that Holocaust denial deniers claim to be digitally retouched or "nonexistent".

Holocaust denial denial is the belief that Holocaust denial never occurred or at least not to the degree that many believe it to. Holocaust denial deniers suggest that Holocaust denial or "Holohoax denial" is a crock of shit as are its supporters, who they also claim don't exist".

Holocaust denial denial accepts the commonly accepted idea that the Jews and other minority groups were killed in Nazi concentration camps. Also prominent is the belief that the Nazis tried to cover up the true events and/or redirect blame for their crimes to the victims, creating sympathy for their cause. In addition, beliefs that the Germans had always planned to frame foreign propaganda for their crimes even from before the war is common, but not universal among Holocaust denial deniers. Some renounce the last claim and assert that it was simply a move made when the prospect fortuitously presented itself.

In summation, Holocaust denial deniers generally believe that the Holocaust was orchestrated by the Nazis for the purpose of restricting living space in Germany to only the rightful Aryan race. While the above is important, it only serves to solidify their claims. Their main claims are as follows:

Holocaust denial deniers argue that unlike Holocaust deniers (whom they deny the existence of), there is an abundant amount of evidence to back up their claims. Indeed, many concentration camps have been found throughout Europe since the end of World War II. Conditions at these camps have been found to be completely inhospitable, providing evidence that their purpose was the methodical slaughter of all people held there. Often mass graves have also been excavated near the sites, demonstrating that what took place was a genocide.

Testimonies of Schutzstaffel officers being tried for crimes against humanity for their involvement in the Holocaust ranged from, "Oh, I'd say about six million Jews or so." to, "Yes, we did it." Almost all of them claimed that the accusations were completely true.

Holocaust denial deniers have also asserted that the lack of prominent articles regarding Holocaust denial is evidence enough that Holocaust denial doesn't exist and is probably a botched hoax of some sorts. The claim that David Irving and other figures who have openly spoken about Holocaust denial "don't exist" is also somehow justified. An informal 2003 report regarding Holocaust negationism from the Open University of Israel stated the following:

Holocaust denial denial has faced extremely heavy criticism throughout the years from both believers of the Holocaust and Holocaust deniers themselves. Many have claimed that David Irving does in fact exist, though no evidence has been brought forward to substantiate this claim.

It has been extremely difficult for supporters of Holocaust denial to provide evidence that they exist, as do their beliefs. And beyond that, it's difficult to prove that their claims are as widespread as many believe them to be as Holocaust denial deniers don't believe in their beliefs to begin with.

Holocaust deniers have stated that Holocaust denial deniers simply attempt to "ignore" Holocaust denial's ideas and those affiliated with them while subconsciously recognizing them. This however, was proven untrue by Dr. Greenstein of the Open University of Israel, who stated, "Who?" when asked about what he thought regarding Holocaust deniers.

David Irving, who has only made brief comments regarding Holocaust denial denial stated that some deny that the denial Holocaust denial deniers deny is actually legitimate denial, and that they are actually attempting reverse psychology through the denial of denying and absurdism. Certainly, the denial of denial is an effect tactic of denial which can solidify initial claims which the denial being denied rose out of, yet they can also harm these claims undeniably. Of course, to Holocaust denial deniers, Irving doesn't exist, so his statements have fallen on deaf ears because nobody understands them.

In response to holocaust denial deniers, a growing movement calling themselves the holocaust denial denial deniers refuse to believe that holocaust denial deniers exist and that although the holocaust did exist, certain aspects of denial in relation to the holocaust, including but not limited to, the denial of it's denial and any other movement with the moniker 'denial' attached to it may not exist, although the choosing of which groups to deny the existence of is somewhat arbitrary according to critics of 'the whole stupid thing', who themselves are facing growing criticism from the 'I'm Confused' movement.

See the article here:
Holocaust denial denial - Uncyclopedia, the content-free ...

Category: Holocaust Denial | Comments Off on Holocaust denial denial – Uncyclopedia, the content-free …
Tags:

Posted By simmons on September 12, 2015

WORLD

January 31, 2009 | Associated Press

A bishop recently rehabilitated by Pope Benedict XVI expressed regret Friday to the pontiff for the "distress and problems" he caused by his statements denying the Holocaust. In a letter to the Vatican, Bishop Richard Williamson, who in a recent TV interview denied that 6 million Jews were murdered during the Holocaust, called his remarks "imprudent."

WORLD

January 25, 2008 | From Times Wire Reports

Israel's Holocaust memorial institution launched an Arabic version of its website, with vivid photos of Nazi atrocities and video of survivors' testimony, to combat Holocaust denial in the Arab and Muslim world. Among those featured on the Yad Vashem site is Dina Beitler, a survivor of the Nazi genocide that killed 6 million Jews in World War II. Beitler, who was shot and left for dead in 1941, tells her story on the site, with Arabic subtitles. "Holocaust denial in various countries exists, and so it is important that people see us, the Holocaust survivors, that they'll listen to our testimonies, and learn the legacy of the Holocaust -- also in Arabic," Beitler, 73, said at Yad Vashem.

ENTERTAINMENT

July 7, 2007

While I agree with Tim Rutten's thoughts [about the lack of media coverage on threats against Salman Rushdie] ("Where Is the West's Outcry?," June 23), letter writer Gina Nahai needs to check her facts before spewing forth more incorrect information (Letters, June 30). It is absolutely untrue that British schools decided to not mention the Holocaust in their textbooks or curriculum. One history department in northern U.K.

WORLD

January 27, 2007 | From the Associated Press

The General Assembly on Friday adopted a resolution introduced by the United States that condemns any denial of the Holocaust. The resolution did not single out any country, but Israel and the United States both suggested that Iran should take note, especially after it provoked widespread anger last month by holding a conference aimed at casting doubt on the Nazi genocide of Jews during World War II. Iran was the only nation to reject the measure, calling it an attempt by the U.S.

OPINION

December 20, 2006 | MAX BOOT, MAX BOOT is a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations. mboot@latimescolumnists.com

MAHMOUD Ahmadinejad has an impeccable sense of timing. Just a week after the Iraq Study Group recommended a heart-to-heart with him, the president of Iran convened a conference in Tehran to examine whether the Holocaust really occurred. The answer from such "scholars" as David Duke, the notorious former Ku Klux Klan grand wizard, was a resounding no. On one level, Ahmadinejad's embrace of Holocaust denial might seem surprising.

OPINION

December 13, 2006

WHAT'S THE perfect way to top off a Holocaust denial conference featuring input from the likes of such scholars as former KKK Grand Wizard David Duke? Why, calling for Israel's obliteration, of course. Iran wrapped its two-day gathering of neo-Nazis, hard-line racists and half-baked historians with a rousing speech from Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Tuesday.

The rest is here:
Articles about Holocaust Denial - latimes

Category: Holocaust Denial | Comments Off on Articles about Holocaust Denial – latimes
Tags:

Posted By admin on September 12, 2015

Six Day War - (In Hebrew - Mil'hement sheshet Hayamim). A war between Israel and Egypt, Jordan and Syria that began on June 5, 1967 and ended on June 10 1967. In the war, Israel occupied the Sinai Peninsula, the Gaza Strip, the West Bank, Jerusalem and the Golan Heights.

1967 Six Day War Timeline (chronology) Israel Intelligence Timeline 1961-1967

Background

The Six Day War occurred against the background of continuing Arab world hostility to the State of Israel, which had begun with the War of Independence. In that war, the newly created state of Israel had defeated the Arab armies that had invaded it, and expanded its territory. The war had created about 700,000 Palestinian Arab refugees, who fled or were expelled in 1948.

Officially, no Arab country recognized the armistice lines of 1949 as international borders, and no Arab country recognized Israel, diplomatically. Israel, according to Arab rhetoric, had no right to exist, and was referred to as "The Zionist entity." Defeating and destroying Israel and "reversing the results of 1948" became central goals of Arab political rhetoric. Prestige and leadership of the Arab world were based on leadership in confrontation of Israel.

Gamal Abdul Nasser and his fellow officers had taken power in Egypt, in order they claimed, to modernize the country and undo the shame of the lost 1948 war. However, in 1956, after Nasser closed the straits of Tiran and Suez canal to Israeli shipping and moved terror squads into the Sinai peninsula, Israel, Britain and France attacked Egypt. Israel captured the entire Sinai peninsula in 100 hours. Before agreeing to withdraw, Israel got an Aide de Memoire from the US that it would support Israel's right to unrestricted access to the straits of Tiran, in accordance with international law, and the UN agreed to station an emergency force in Sinai (UNEF).

Nasser claimed a "victory" in that he had gotten Israel, Britain and France to withdraw, but the UNEF and the free access of Israeli shipping were a constant shameful reminder. Nasser bid to lead the Arab world, but his plans foundered in economic woes and a failed war in Yemen, evoking inter-Arab rivalry. Constant taunts dared Nasser to dismiss the UNEF and close the straits of Tiran.

Tension began developing between Israel and Arab countries in the 1960s. Israel began to implement its National Water Carrier plan, which pumps water from the Sea of Galilee to irrigate south and central Israel. The project was in accordance with a plan proposed by US envoy Eric Johnston in 1955, and agreed to by Arab engineers. Arab governments refused to participate however, because of the implied recognition of Israel. In secret meetings, Israel and Jordan agreed to abide by the water quotas set by the plan.

The newly formed Palestinian Fatah movement seized on the Israeli diversion as an "imperialist event" that would catalyze their revolution, and Yasser Arafat began calling for war to eliminate Israel. In the Fatah newspaper, Filistinunah, ("our Palestine") Arafat ridiculed Egyptian President Nasser and other Arab leaders for their impotence, and called for effective action against Israel. Nasser decided to found the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) as a "tame" alternative to the Fatah, and placed Ahmed Shukhairy, an ineffective and bombastic diplomat at its head.

The Syrians, who had broken with Nasser's pan-Arabism, countered by supporting Fatah and attempted to take over the Fatah group. Syrian army intelligence recruited terrorists for actions against Israel, giving credit for the operations to Fatah. The first of these actions was announced on December 31, 1964, an attack on the Israel water carrier at Beit Netopha, but in fact no attack had taken place. A second attempt was made on January 2, 1965, but the explosives charge was disarmed. However, successful attacks soon followed on January 14 and February 28. In the 18 months preceding the war, there ware 120 terror attacks, resulting in 11 fatalities. These minor terrorist activities received great publicity in the Arab world, and were contrasted with the lack of action and bombastic talk of Gamal Nasser, challenging Nasser's leadership. This ferment is considered the catalyst of the events that brought about the Six day war. It is a moot point whether it is to be attributed to Syrian rivalry with Nasser, or as Yasser Arafat and the Palestinians claim, to the Fatah movement. Faced with the "heroic" deeds of the Palestinians under Syrian tutelage, Nasser was pushed to an increasingly bellicose stance.

In several summit conferences beginning in 1964, Arab leaders ratified the establishment of the PLO, declared their resolve to destroy Israel, and decided to divert the sources of the Jordan river that feed the Sea of Galilee, to prevent Israel from implementing the water carrier plan. The Syrians and Lebanese began to implement the diversions. Israel responded by firing on the tractors and equipment doing the work in Syria, using increasingly accurate and longer range guns as the Syrians moved the equipment from the border. This was followed by Israeli attempts to cultivate the demilitarized zones (DMZ) as provided in the armistice agreements. Israel was within its rights according to the armistice agreements, but Moshe Dayan claimed many years later that 80% of the incidents were deliberately provoked. In reality, the incidents were provoked in order to draw artillery fire, so that Israel would have an excuse to fire on the equipment being used by the Syrians for diversion of the headwaters of the Jordan. The Syrians responded by firing in the DMZs (Click here for a map of the demilitarized zones). When Israelis responded in force, Syria began shelling Israeli towns in the north, and the conflict escalated into air strikes. The USSR was intent on protecting the new Ba'athist pro-Soviet government of Syria, and represented to the Syrians and Egyptians that Israel was preparing to attack Syria. As tension rose, Syria appealed to Egypt, believing the claim of the USSR that Israel was massing troops on the Syrian border. The claim was false and was denied by the UN.

Beginning in May 1967, unprovoked actions by Nasser and other Arab leaders created a feeling of impending disaster in Israel. Actions by the United States and UN, and lack of action, gave every reason to believe that the world intended to abandon Israel to whatever aggressive plans Nasser might have. Nasser, motivated by the need to re-assert leadership in the Arab world, was "pushing the envelope." It was felt that inaction by Israel in the best case would result in dangerous concessions, and in the worst case would goad Nasser and his allies into a devastating first strike attack. Hindsight has shown that the Arabs were no match for Israel. However it is also clear from the record that the feeling that the US would not honor its commitments was probably justified, and that had Israel not acted, it is almost certain that Egypt would have been able to close the Straits of Tiran permanently to Israeli shipping. It is probable, according to several sources, that the Egyptians were planning to attack Israel, though pressure from USSR forced them to abandon the plan.

On May 14, Israeli intelligence noted that Nasser had moved considerable forces into the Sinai desert. On the same day, Egypt asked for withdrawal of the UNEF forces. Secretary General U Thant stalled for time. On May 16, 1967, a Radio Cairo broadcast stated: "The existence of Israel has continued too long. We welcome the Israeli aggression. We welcome the battle we have long awaited. The peak hour has come. The battle has come in which we shall destroy Israel." Egypt repeated the request to withdraw UNEF forces on May 16, and UN Secretary General U Thant agreed to remove the troops on May 18. Formally, the troops could only be stationed in Egypt with Egyptian agreement. However, it had been believed believed that Nasser had really hoped U Thant would not remove the troops, and that he could use the presence of the UN troops as an excuse to do nothing.

Since the reaction to removal of UN troops was tepid, Nasser surmised that neither Israel nor the US would obstruct his ambitions. On May 23, Nasser closed the straits of Tiran to Israeli shipping. The United States failed to live up to its guarantees of freedom of the waterways to Israel. A torrent of rhetoric issued from Arab capitals and Arab representatives to the UN. In the Arab world, Nasser, previously chided for inaction, was widely hailed as a liberator. Cartoons showed jackbooted Egyptian soldiers crushing caricatures of ghetto Jews.

At the UN, PLO Chairman Ahmed Shukhairy announced that "if it will be our privilege to strike the first blow" the PLO would expel from Palestine all Zionists who had arrived after 1917 and eliminate the state of Israel. In a speech to Arab Trade Unionists on May 26, 1967, Nasser justified the dismissal of the UNEF, and made it clear that Egypt was prepared to fight Israel for Palestinian rights. He also attacked the Jordanians as tools of the imperialists, stepping up the constant pressure on Jordan's King Hussein.

The US was caught by surprise by developments in the Middle East, but it may have unwittingly contributed to the crisis. In January of 1967, Senator Symington discussed his recent trip to the Middle East in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Symington noted that US diplomats were disturbed by the big Israeli retaliatory raid on November 13, 1966 in Samu, in the West Bank (then under Jordanian control). The US had apparently developed the theory that Israel was attacking Jordan rather than Syria or Egypt, because Jordan was a US client and would be restrained by the US. The attack had weakened King Hussein. These concerns must have been impressed on the Israelis, who thereafter may have focused more attention on Syria.

In assessing the situation in the Middle East shortly thereafter, on January 16, 1967, Secretary State Dean Rusk delivered himself of three pronouncements which indicate that he, and apparently the entire US diplomatic establishment, were either blissfully ignorant of the situation or else they were unwilling to share their knowledge with the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. He asserted that the tension between Israel and Syria was due to a dispute over the borders in the demilitarized zone. It was in fact due to Syrian efforts to divert the sources of the Jordan. He asserted that Fatah terrorists were not being supported by Arab governments, whereas in fact they were trained and apparently armed by Syrian military intelligence. Rusk's biggest error was that predicted that there would not be a war. These were not failures of insight or intelligence gathering. The decisions of the Arab summits were a matter of public record. They created the PLO to carry on "armed struggle" against Israel. They decided on the Jordan diversion scheme. They announced their plans to destroy Israel, in a time table that envisioned a war in 1968. All this was known, and yet Rusk claimed he did not have evidence of Syrian involvement and didn't think there would be a war, because neither side wanted one! None of the committee members challenged him.

A major insight into United States policy toward Israel and the Middle East is gained from a singular revelation. In 1967, the United States had a plan to intervene militarily in the Middle East, including an attack on Israel, should the integrity of any nation be threatened. The United States was apparently seriously contemplating military intervention against Israel, as well as against Arab nations in the event of a war. This puts into stark perspective the empty reality behind the proclamations of generations of United States politicians regarding the "special relationship" of Israel with the United States. In reality, the relation to Israel is variable. The State Department tends to favor Arab states, while presidents at least feel they must pay lip-service to the "special relationship" with Israel. Myths about the "Israel Lobby" to the contrary notwithstanding, there is no reason to assume the United States will stand by commitments it has made to Israel if it decided it was inconvenient to do so, in view of the evasive behavior of the U.S. government in the critical period preceding the Six Day War. This is especially underlined by the fact that Lyndon Johnson was known to be a "special friend" of Israel.

Israeli diplomats repeatedly implored U.S. President Johnson to make good on the US pledge to allow Israel freedom of navigation in the straits of Tiran, or to support Israeli military action. The US, for its part, publicly insisted that it was working to assemble an international force that would open the straits, a "Regatta." It developed that France and Britain were cool to the idea, and President Johnson found that the US congress was unwilling to back involvement in another military adventure, given the problems the US was facing in Vietnam. From Damascus, U.S. ambassador Smythe telegraphed that U.S. attempts to open the straits of Tiran would meet with opposition of the 'monolithic Arab nation,' that the attempt was "foredoomed," and that Israel was an unviable client state, which did not merit US support. Oil interests including the Aramco company warned against US support for Israeli navigation in the Gulf of Aqaba:

The Israeli government probably did not want war, and some at least were fearful of war. Ben-Gurion berated Chief of Staff Yitzhak Rabin for making aggressive statements that had, according to him, escalated the conflict and gotten Israel into trouble.

Israeli Foreign Minister Abba Eban was sent to the US on May 25th. His missions were to get from the United States some guarantee against an Egyptian attack and some firm action to break the blockade of the straits of Tiran. Prime Minister Levi Eshkol needed these in order to fight pressure to launch an immediate attack.

Israel presented an intelligence estimate to the US on May 25th, coinciding with Eban's arrival, according to which an Egyptian attack in Sinai was imminent. Some sources claim that this was a deliberate exaggeration meant to goad the US into supportive action. The CIA dismissed the estimate as unfounded. In Six Days of War, (Oxford, 2002) Michael Oren, relying primarily on Egyptian sources, details an Egyptian plan to attack Israel, operation fajr (Dawn), that was supposedly detected by Israel and stopped by US and Soviet intervention a few hours before it was to take place in the early morning of May 27, 1967. The same plan is mentioned in other sources (e.g. Benny Morris, Righteous Victims, 1999, page 307). It is unclear if Israel had this information on May 25. US sources declassified to date do not give give any indication of this purported attack plan. A CIA estimate of May 25, which "scrubbed" the Israeli estimate, claimed that Nasser and Syria were dragged into the conflict by inter-Arab rivalry and did not contemplate a war.

Abba Eban got nothing. He was turned down by Secretary of State Dean Rusk He was turned down by Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara, and he was turned down, essentially by President Johnson. The US could not commit itself to the defense of Israel for constitutional reasons, according to the administration. The US could not establish any intelligence or military liaison with Israel. The US could not open the straits of Tiran alone without first attempting to do so through a multinational force or the UN. Israel must not attack the Arabs. These messages were contained in a written statement that President Johnson handed Eban at their meeting on May 26. The same constitutional reasons, one may point out, did not prevent the United States from becoming involved in a war to defend South Vietnam.

It is clear from declassified documents that the US was interested in restraining Israel solely because it was concerned for its own interests in the Middle East and fearful of economic repercussions, and that the US would be unable, in the end, to actually open the straits of Tiran, owing to Arab objections. A memorandum from Dean Rusk to President Johnson on May 26, preparatory to Johnson's meeting with Abba Eban states:

You have two basic options now:

(1) to let the Israelis decide how best to protect their own national interests, in the light of the advice we have given them: i.e., to "unleash" them. We recommend strongly against this option.

(2) To take a positive position, but not a final commitment, on the British proposal. The British Cabinet meets on the plan tomorrow.

We recommend this policy, as our best hope of preventing a war which could gravely damage many American national interests.

In the same document, U.S. Ambassador to the UN Arthur Goldberg is quoted as advising a "compromise" that would give Nasser a victory: "Non-Strategic" Israeli cargos would be allowed through the straits of Tiran bound for the port of Eilat in ships flying foreign flags. "Strategic" cargos presumably included oil tankers.

On May 29, 1967, Nasser gave a bellicose speech to the Egyptian National Assemblyly, stating,"God will surely help and urge us to restore the situation to what it was in 1948." Intelligence reports to the contrary notwithstanding, rhetoric and actions in the Arab world were making it clear that the Arab leaders were serious about destroying Israel.

On May 30, a letter sent by Levi Eshkol again asked for some sign that the US was going to make good on its commitments, or release Israel from its commitment to restraint. On the same day, Jordan signed a defense pact with Egypt, readying itself for war. King Hussein stated: "The armies of Egypt, Jordan, Syria and Lebanon are poised on the borders of Israel...to face the challenge, while standing behind us are the armies of Iraq, Algeria, Kuwait, Sudan and the whole Arab nation. This act will astound the world. Today they will know that the Arabs are arranged for battle, the critical hour has arrived. We have reached the stage of serious action and not declarations."

Arab Defense Pact

In the few days since Eban's mission, the UN debate had finished without result, the "Regatta" was showing itself to be impractical, the Arabs had signed a defense pact, and the US had come to understand quite well that Israel was losing ground and taking risks.

A fair appreciation of the situation was given by Harold Saunders on May 31. Saunders made the following points:

Israel had suffered from the restraint: "It seems that the UAR has won all the chips to date."

Restraining Israel was a mistakeke: "By not stopping an Israeli strike as early as 21 May when Egyptian positions were still fluid, we would probably have witnessed a limited Arab defeat and then had to move the international machinery in to restore peace....{A]ssuming she held her own, we would not have been linked with Israel and she would have brought to bear the only counter that the US or anyone else has yet found to the war of national liberation-force. Nasser as a dominating force would have been physically weakened, and the moderate governments might have been freed to ignore him and concentrate on their own development in association with us.

Now US was linked with Israel, and would be even more committed:

For twenty years Israel has sought a special relationship-even a private security guarantee-with us. We have steadfastly refused in order to preserve our other interests in the Middle East. We argued that our policy worked to Israel's best interest too. Now we are committed to side with Israel and, in opening the Straits of Tiran, even to wage war on the Arabs. In short, we have chosen sides-not with the constructive Arabs and Israel but with Israel alone against all the Arabs.

Whoever is the bigger winner, we are the sure loser. If we follow our present course, we stand to lose economically (see the Task Force's rundown of the "economic vulnerabilities") and to suffer substantial Soviet gains. If we back away from Israel, we're a paper tiger. In building a new Middle East along the regional lines in your vision, the closer we get to Israel, the longer we delay our constructive contribution to make that vision a reality.

U.S. should let Israel "go it alone" Eshkol himself says he'll have to go this route within a week or two if we can't produce. He's correct that we don't have any right to hold him back longer while his enemy gets stronger unless we're willing to take on the Arabs ourselves. Pretty soon we'll have Soviet warships in the Red Sea. We ought to consider admitting that we have failed and allow fighting to ensue.

Nonetheless, President Johnson did not change his policy. He finally replied to Levy Eshkol's letter on June 3. He said nothing. He reiterated the same points he had made to Abba Eban earlier. In fact, he included the same written document. When war broke out on June 5, State Department Spokesman Robert McCloskey said, in an infamous communique, was to say that "the U.S. position is neutral in word, thought and deed."

US and Israeli assessments were that Israel would win any war handily, despite the huge superiority in armor, aircraft, and troops favoring the combined forces of the Arab countries. US officials publicly told Israeli officials that by waiting and not attacking that they had gained and not lost, but US intelligence estimates and secret documents reveal that the US was well aware that Israel faced risks and also understood quite well that Nasser had won the first round. Israel estimated they might lose 4,000 dead, and had dug 10,000 graves and prepared some 14,000 hospital beds. The US had several estimates. . One CIA estimate insisted that Israel would beat the Arabs handily, predicated on the notion that Israel would lose half its air force in a surprise attack and still be in a condition to be resupplied. The National board of estimates was a bit more realistic and frank. It noted:

The Israelis face dismaying choices. Surprised and shaken by Nasser's action, they failed to take the instant military counteraction which might have been most effective. If they attack now they will face far more formidable opposition than in the rapid campaign of 1956. We believe that they would still be able to drive the Egyptians away from the entrance to the Strait of Tiran, but it would certainly cost them heavy losses of men and materiel. We are not sure that they have sufficient stockpiles of ammunition and equipment for a war lasting more than three or four weeks, and it is possible that they would not embark upon a major campaign without prior assurances from the US of adequate resupply.

Israel opts for war

Against this background, pressure grew in Israel. When Hussein signed the pact with Nasser on May 30, it astounded the world indeed. Most especially, it astounded and alarmed Israeli military intelligence and the IDF General Staff. The Nasser - Hussein pact made war inevitable. Mobilization was expensive, diplomatic efforts were producing no results. In Israel, mobilization paralyzes the economy, since every able-bodied is removed from the work force. Israeli Prime Minister Levi Eshkol appeared hesitant, and supposedly stuttered in a dramatic radio speech to the nation on May 28. (see Levi Eshkol radio address, 1967). IDF officers began pressuring the civilian establishment to declare war, because it was considered that an Arab attack might be imminent, and because Israel's ability to maintain its army fully mobilized is limited, but Prime Minister Eshkol was reluctant to take action, and Foreign Minister Abba Eban opposed unilateral action, which he believed would be against the wishes of the United States. However, with virtually nothing in hand from the United States, Eban's voice carried little weight. Ariel Sharon admitted later that he and others, including Yitzhak Rabin, had discussed the possibility of a sort of coup, in which government officials were to be locked in a room, while the army started the war, but the idea never got past the stage of thinking out loud. Some claim that this was only a joke.

The government of Levi Eshkol, under severe pressure, had been expanded June 1 to include Moshe Dayan as Defense Minister and the right wing Herut party of Mr. Begin. Johnson had taken four or five days to reply to P.M. Eshkol's earlier urgent plea for help sent May 30, the reply was not a cause for optimism.

On June 4, Iraq likewise joined a military alliance with Egypt and committed itself to war. On May 31, the Iraqi President Rahman Aref announced, "This is our opportunity to wipe out the ignominy which has been with us since 1948. Our goal is clear--to wipe Israel off the map."

Mossad chief Meir Amit had been dispatched to Washington and returned, either with an assessment that the US would not stand in the way, or more likely with an assessment that the US would not do anything for Israel, and therefore there was not point in waiting in any case. When the Israel cabinet met on the morning of Sunday June 4, it had Amit's assessment, it also had Johnson's letter before it, indicating the intransigence of the United States. Moshe Dayan, who had become Defense Minister June 1, had been feverishly preparing for war.

Armaments and Battle Array

Estimates of armaments and troops vary.

Summary:

Israel: 275,000 troops (of which about 200,000 were reserves) 200 aircraft, 1,100 tanks, (According to Oren, 2002, page 168, but on page 171 he states that there were 250 aircraft). or 250,000 troops, 192 combat aircraft, 40 trainers, 1100 tanks, 400 guns and heavy mortars (Morris, Righteous Victims, 1999 page 311).

Total Arab forces: About 250,000 troops (not counting 50,000 in Yemen) 530 aircraft, 1,500 tanks (some sources claim 2,800 tanks), broken down as follows:

Egypt: 180,000 troops (of which 50,000 were deployed in Yemen - some of these were returned to Sinai), About 420 aircraft, of which 242 were MiG fighters, and the rest were apparently Ilyushin and Topolev bombers and Sukhoi fighter-bombers, 900 tanks, 800 artillery pieces (Morris, page 312,318);

Jordan: 56,000 troops, 24 Hawker-Hunter jet fighters, 294 tanks (including 30 Iraqi), 194 artillery pieces (including 34 Iraqi) (Morris, 1999, page 312). Jordanian troops were reinforced with several Iraqi brigades.

Syria: 70,000 troops, 92 fighter aircraft and two bombers, 300 tanks, 265 artillery pieces and heavy mortars (Morris, 1999, page 313).

The table shows all combat aircraft types of each country. Syria and Egypt alone had over 500 aircraft vs 343 for Israel, and they outclassed Israeli aircraft. The Iraqi air force did not not commit most of its air craft to the battle.

Six Day War: Detailed Air Battle Array*

Iraq

*Approximate numbers of all craft, including those not in service. Israeli "fighter" air craft total includes 45 Fouga Magister (Zukit) trainers that were actually not suitable as fighters. It is not clear if trainer aircraft of other countries are included. Source

At the time, it was believed that the Arab states had a decisive superiority in the number and quality of weapons, and a potential superiority in manpower, if all reserves were fielded. Prior to 1967, Israel had gotten almost no military aid from the United States. Egypt and Syria were equipped with large quantities of the latest Soviet military equipment. Israel's main arms supplier was France. Israel had about half as many aircraft as the Egyptians, and the Israeli aircraft were mostly old or of limited capacity. They included 45 Fouga Magister trainer jets that were used as decoys according to most accounts, 50 Ouragan bombers, 20 Vautour light bombers, and 35 Mystere Mark IV fighters, 35 Super Mystere and 65 Mirage IIIc fighters: 250 aircraft in all according to the estimate of Michael Oren (Six Days of War, page 171). A more detailed listing of the capabilities of these aircraft is given here: Operation Focus. Even the Mirages were no match in a dog fight for the Mig-21 fighters acquired by Egypt from the USSR, which had a rate of climb of about 120 m/s, versus 83 m/s for for the Mirage, of which Israel had 65. The Arab states had over 300 MiG aircraft, of which about half were MiG-21. The Mysteres in Israel's possession had a top speed of Mach 1.1, about half that of the MiG-21 or Mirage IIIc.

* Nominal specifications from various sources, especially Fighter Planes and The Israel Air Force The payload of the MiG-21 is not given in any available sources, but described as "Small" Egypt probably had 100 or more of these aircraft, as 90 were destroyed in the first wave of attacks, along with 20 MiG 19 and 75 MiG 17. Rate of climb depends on the fuel load of the craft, initial speed and altitude. Maneuverability and similar issues are not addressed in formal specifications, but may be crucial in combat: Turn radius, stability, maximum dive angle, max. climb angle, efficiency of the armament (the last can only be determined in combat).

On paper, the IDF had a large number of "tanks" matching or almost matching the arms of the Arab countries. However, while Syrians and Egyptians were equipped with late model Soviet heavy tanks, many of the Israeli "tanks" were in fact tiny French AMX anti-tank vehicles, and most of the heavy tanks were either British Centurions or refurbished WWII Sherman tanks fitted with diesel engines and with 105 mm guns. Israel had also been allowed to purchase an unknown number of M-48 Patton tanks from Germany or the US in 1965. It is known that the Germans had sold Israel at least 60 such tanks. In 1967 however, many of these tanks were being converted from gasoline to diesel engines. The Israeli government asked the Americans for 100 replacement tanks in May of 1967. However, these and all other arms requests were refused.

Several factors dominated Israeli strategy and concerns. The first was that the war had to be over quickly. It was understood that as soon as Arab states had suffered significant losses, they would sue for a cease fire in the UN, backed by their Soviet allies. The second was that Israel did not have the troops or equipment to fight on three fronts at the same time. Israel would have to gamble that the Jordanian and Syrian fronts would remain relatively quiet until the Egyptians were no longer a threat. The third was that Israel would be using up war materiel rapidly, and with no immediate prospect of replacements. Israeli roads were poor by international standards, Jordanian and Syrian roads were poorer, and Egyptian roads were virtually nonexistent. Israel did not have sufficient numbers of vehicles for troop transport. Therefore, civilian vehicles of all sorts, including busses, sedans and trucks, were "drafted" for the duration. Some of these vehicles were in poor repair and were overcome by the heat and long lines of vehicles, adding to the confusion. That meant that the rapid Israeli advance caused incredible traffic jams, with troop transports and armor and guns snarled at critical junctions for hours, limiting the possibility for rapid initial deployment.

Detailed timing of battles: 1967 Six Day War Timeline (chronology)

Operation Focus - (For detailed account see - Operation Focus) Israel attacked the Egyptians beginning on June 5, 1967 at about 07:45 hours. Israeli radio announced that Egyptians had opened fire and Israeli forces were returning fire. A terse battle announcement was repeated all through the morning of June 5, in which Moshe Dayan said, "We are a small but brave nation, and we shall overcome them." In the first hours of the war (operation Moked or Operation Focus), two waves of Israel Air Force attacks destroyed about 286 enemy aircraft, mostly on the ground, to achieve total air superiority. Almost every combat aircraft in the IAF participated in each wave. The attack was made possible in part by the excellent training and organization of ground crews, which could turn around returning aircraft, fully armed and refueled, in a few minutes.

By about 08:30 hours it was understood that the attack was a total and almost unbelievable success, but most Israelis did not know that until the following day. By 10:35 hours, Israeli Air Force Commander Moti Hod could say, "The Egyptian Air Force has ceased to exist." The Egyptian air force announced, however, that it had downed about 160 Israeli aircraft and was winning the war. Egyptian radio broadcasts continued to insist they were winning throughout the first day.

Egyptian response was minimal. Marshall Amer was in the air that morning and had ordered anti-aircraft defenses not to fire at anything, for fear of hitting his plane. The Egyptians were left with 35 operational aircraft.

Israel Mirage Jets returning from Egyptt

Egyptian Aircraft destroyed on the runway - Six Day War

Land War in Sinai - Israeli armor executed a three pronged strike against Egypt. In the north the three brigades of General Israel Tal's division (ugdah - a reinforced division), crossed the border at Nahal Oz and south of Khan Yunis. They proceeded swiftly to the Rafah Gap, held by four Egyptian divisions. Tal's division had 250 tanks, 50 guns, a paratrooper brigade and a reconnaissance unit. Following fierce battles led by Col. Shmuel Gonen, Israeli armor broke through to the outskirts of El-Arish. Israel lost 28 tanks, 93 men were wounded and 66 killed.

The central division led by Avraham Yoffe, and the southern prong consisting of Ariel Sharon's division, converged on the heavily defended and fortified Umm Qatef (Abu-Ageila-Kusseima) region. Egyptian forces there included one infantry division (the 2nd), a battalion of tank destroyers and a tank regiment.

Sharon sent two of his brigades to the north of Um- Qatef, one to break through the defenses at Abu-Ageila to the south, and the other to block the road to El-Arish and to encircle Abu-Ageila from the east. At the same time, a paratrooper force was landed there and destroyed the artillery, preventing it from engaging Israeli armor. Combined forces of armor, paratroopers, infantry, artillery and combat engineers attacked the Egyptian disposition from the front flanks and rear, cutting the enemy off. The breakthrough battles which were in sandy areas, three three thousand yard trenches, and minefields, continued until June 8.

The Egyptians retreated in panic and amidst numerous contradictory orders. The Israelis decided to bypass the Egyptian units and destroy them in the mountainous passes of West Sinai. By the evening of June 6, General Amer had ordered the Egyptians to retreat. The Israelis hastened to cut off their retreat. On June 6 and 7 all three Israeli divisions, reinforced by two armored brigades, rushed westwards to the passes. Sharon's division first went southward then westward to Mitla Pass. It was joined there by parts of Yoffe's division, while its other units blocked the Gidi Pass. Tal's units stopped at various points along the length of the Suez Canal.

Israel's blocking action was only partially successful. The Gidi pass was captured before the Egyptians approached it, but elsewhere some Egyptian units did manage to pass through and cross the Canal to safety.

Abba Eban had predicted Israel would have 72 hours before a cease fire was enforced, and his predictions were approximately correct. However, the cease fire efforts were held up initially, because, incredibly, Nasser refused a cease fire offer on the evening of June 7, unless Israel withdrew to the border. The line was also taken by the Soviets. By the evening of June 8, Nasser had accepted the cease fire, but Israeli troops were in control of all of Sinai. Israel had completed the conquest of the Sinai peninsula, sending infantry units to Ras-Sudar on the western coast. Sharm El-Sheikh was captured a day earlier by units of the Israeli Navy. In four days, Israel defeated the largest and most heavily equipped Arab army, leaving Sinai filled with hundreds of burning or abandoned Egyptian vehicles.

Heliborne troops at the Suez Canal,

In order to excuse the loss, Egyptian President Nasser fabricated the story that the United States had given Israel air support from the sixth fleet, and the British had collaborated as well. This story spread rapidly throughout the Middle East. Mobs attacked US and British embassies, oil shipments were embargoed, and several countries broke off diplomatic relations with the United States.

Israel intercepted a telephone call from Nasser to Jordan's King Hussein, in which Nasser explained how the story would be fabricated, and coordinated the versions to be told. (For transcript and background: Transcript of Nasser-Hussein telephone conversation, June 6, 1967 ) At great political cost at home, the US had refrained from giving Israel any material support, in order to keep the friendship of moderate Arab states. Nasser's fabrication set the Arab states against the United States nonetheless, and in turn, helped set the Americans against the Egyptians.

See maps: Map of Egyptian Front Israel 6 Day War - June 5-6 Map of Egyptian Front Israel 6 Day War - June 6-7

The Liberty - On June 8, 1967, Israelis attacked and crippled a US CIA intelligence ship, the Liberty, that had been stationed off the coast of Gaza. Apparently, it was a case of mistaken identity, though Liberty survivors insist that it was deliberate. The Liberty had been ordered to move 100 miles off shore, but it never received the order. Israelis claim they were unable to identify the ship, and lacking the close liaison they had repeatedly requested from the Americans, they were unaware of the ship's position. They had correctly identified the ship on the morning of June 8 as American, but had lost contact by the afternoon. Americans claim the ship was flying an American flag, but Israeli pilots and a torpedo boat were unable to see any flag.

Jordan - Jordanian artillery began firing at Jerusalem on the first day of the war, despite a warning by Israeli PM Levi Eshkol to stay out of the war, and then the Jordan Legion advanced and took over the headquarters of the UN (Governor's house - Armon Hanatziv ) in Jerusalem. Jordanian artillery (155 mm US Howitzers) fired on the suburbs of Tel Aviv, and at Ramat David in the north. Jordanian Hawker-Hunters bombed Netanya, Kfar Sirkin and Kfar Saba. The Soviet ambassador to Jordan remarked to US Ambassador Burns, "Our estimate is that if the Israelis do not receive arms, we think the Arabs will win the war if they are allowed to fight it to the finish."

After warning King Hussein repeatedly to cease fire and withdraw, through the UN and through the US, and after accepting a cease fire proposed by the UN but rejected by Jordan, Israel attacked. Israel destroyed the Jordanian air force on June 5, and then proceeded to conquer the West Bank and East Jerusalem. on June 6-8. The Jordan Legion put up stiff resistance in a few battles, but they were no match for Israel, especially after Israel had wiped out the Jordanian air force. The Jordanian Patton tanks outranged the Israeli Shermans. However, if the Sherman tanks could get in close enough, they found that the weak point of the Jordanian Patton tanks was their external auxiliary gas tanks, which caught fire easily, and a fair number of tanks were destroyed in this way.

Israeli troops overlooking Jerusalem, 19677

Six Day War: Israeli soldiers at the Western Wall

Uzi Narkiss, Yigal Allon, Itzhak Rabin and others certainly wanted to "finish" unfinished business of 1948, conquer the old city and East Jerusalem, avenge the 1948ethnic cleansing of Jerusalem by the Jordan Legion, restore the Jewish quarter and return to the Hebrew University campus, that had been isolated on Mt. Scopus. Jerusalem is an important national and religious symbol for Zionism and for the Jewish people. On the other hand, it was understood that because of Jerusalem's never-implemented international status, and because of its importance to Islam and Christianity, conquest of Jerusalem could evoke serious opposition from West as well as the Arab world, and would have diplomatic repercussions. Once it was conquered, in Israel there would be tremendous opposition to giving up any part of it, and particularly the Temple Mount and wailing wall (Western Wall) on religious and national grounds.

See maps: Map of Israel - Jerusalem front details in the 6 Day War Map of Jordanian Front in Israel 6-Day War 1967

Syria During the first days of the war, Syrian artillery based in the Golan Heights pounded civilian targets in northern Israel. After dealing with Egypt, Israel decided to conquer the Golan heights, despite opposition and doubts of some in the government, including Moshe Dayan, who had been appointed defense minister. On June 8, fear of Soviet intervention caused the government to cancel a planned strike on the Golan, due chiefly to the opposition of Moshe Dayan. Both Chief of Staff Rabin and head of the Northern Command David (Dado) Elazar were frustrated by the decision. Dayan changed his mind, apparently when intercepted communications made it apparent that the Egyptian army had collapsed and that the Syrian army was not in a position to offer serious resistance. On June 9 Dayan authorized a limited attack, operation Hammer. Syria claimed it was observing the cease fire, and that Israel was violating it. Israel claimed that Syrians were continuing to shell Israel. Israeli credibility was aided by the fact that Syria invented Israeli air attacks on Cairo and Damascus, and announced the fall of Quneitra in the Golan prematurely. It was clearly only a matter of hours before pressure would mount to stop any Israeli offensive. Because of the need for haste, bulldozers were sent to storm the heights in exposed positions, suffering high casualties. Syrian troops were well dug in in cement pillboxes, and fought stubbornly in places like Tel al Fakhr. However, the initial Syrian resistance soon crumbled and Syrian troops began fleeing. At the same time, pressure from the United States and USSR for a halt to the advance mounted. Israel agreed to a cease fire on June 10, 1967 after conquering Quneitra and completed the conquest of the Golan Heights. UN Resolution 242 called for negotiations of a permanent peace between the parties, and for Israeli withdrawal from lands occupied in 1967.

See Map: Map of Golan Front - Israel 6-Day War

Military Results

Israel captured 42,000 square miles of territory. Israeli fatalities in the war were officially given as 679 dead and 2,563 wounded, but may have been as high as 800 dead eventually. Estimates of Arab casualties vary from about 5,000 to as high as 21,000 dead1 and 45,000 wounded. Israel lost 15 prisoners of war. Israel destroyed between 452 and 469 aircraft in all and lost 36. Israel captured almost 6,000 prisoners of war. 320 tanks, two SAM missile batteries 480 guns and 10,000 vehicles were captured from Egypt. Most of the rest of the Egyptian hardware was destroyed. Jordan lost 179 tanks, and Syria lost 118 tanks.2The Arab countries lost thousands of vehicles and artillery pieces. Between 175,000 and 250,000 Palestinians fled the West Bank for Jordan or were expelled. France had declared an arms embargo on Israel before the war, and the US did not accede to Israeli requests for rearmament. Syria and Egypt rearmed rapidly.

(see Note 2)

Fighter and interceptor

MiG-19 'Farmer'

MiG-17 'Fresco'

Su-7 'Fitter'

Hawker Hunter

Bomber

Continued here:
Six Day War - 6 Day war - Definition ... - Zionism & Israel

Category: Zionism | Comments Off on Six Day War – 6 Day war – Definition … – Zionism & Israel
Tags:

Posted By admin on September 12, 2015

No Place for Hate, an initiative of the Anti-Defamation League, enables schools and organizations to challenge anti-Semitism, racism and bigotry in all forms. By providing an innovative and powerful model for creating more inclusive environments, No Place for Hate aims to reduce bias and bullying, increase appreciation for diversity and build communities of respect. The initiative is free-of-charge, and is tailored to fit the needs and cultures of any school or organization.

The Philadelphia Regional Office first implemented No Place for Hate as a community-based initiative in 2001, and in 2005 the program was adapted to meet the needs of schools. No Place for Hate was officially endorsed by the Governor of Pennsylvania in the Fall of 2006 and is currently active in 220 schools and organizations throughout eastern Pennsylvania, southern New Jersey and Delaware. Current media partners include Channel 6abc. For more information, please contact us.

Read the rest here:
Anti-Defamation League | No Place for Hate | Philadelphia

Category: Anti-Defamation League | Comments Off on Anti-Defamation League | No Place for Hate | Philadelphia
Tags:

Posted By simmons on September 11, 2015

Each week we share a random video clip to fuel your travel dreams. This week, we take in the sights, sounds, and experiences that reward a curious tra...

Rick Steves

Author of European travel guidebooks and host of travel shows on public television and public radio

Given my long public record of correcting misperceptions about Islam and championing the rights of American Muslims, why was I consorting with the so-called "enemy"?

If GCC officials slowly pivot toward the perception that their long-term interests reside in an improved relationship toward Iran, such a strategic shift would be seen in Riyadh as an erosion of GCC unity against an emboldened Iran.

After five weeks in Israel, a couple of days after the war ended, I left the bubble -- only to realize I had just reentered another. A benign bubble, for sure, substituting "rationality" for hatred, godless happiness for divine devotion, but a bubble nonetheless.

Uriel Abulof

Associate professor of politics, Tel-Aviv University; LISD Senior Research Fellow, Princeton Universitys Woodrow Wilson School

No doubt, the bombastic Donald is an unlikely president. Yet what may be most extraordinary about his campaign is that on foreign policy, at least, he may be the most sensible Republican in the race.

It's imperative that the Jewish and Israel-loving community never succumb to battle-fatigue over the Iran deal and make things personal. Cory's choice to vote for the Iran deal is not a personal betrayal or a display of disloyalty to the Jewish community.

Rabbi Shmuley Boteach

Rabbi Shmuley, "America's Rabbi," is the international best-selling author of 30 books and an award-winning TV host and columnist.

During my term as Israel's Ambassador in Washington, I visited Pollard in his North Carolina prison. I did not find him defiant. I did not find him exasperated over why the U.S. reneged on its deal. I found only a fellow Jew in poor health and in need of liberty.

Danny Ayalon

Former Israeli Ambassador to the U.S., Rennert Visiting Professor of Foreign Policy Studies at Yeshiva University

President Barack Obama and Governor Jerry Brown have both been pushing the envelope of efforts to bring climate change under control and running up against major ingrown opposition to their efforts.

A Republican former secretary of state and a Democratic "Jewish mother" may have just given us the strongest case yet for the nuclear agreement with Iran. The first is a pillar of the "realist" camp in the American national security establishment. The second is a rising star in the Democratic Party from a heavily Jewish district in South Florida. Together, they represent key constituencies whose support for the historic accord is critical to isolating right-wing opponents and preventing last-minute sabotage attempts. Together, they also lay out a compelling narrative of why the agreement is so important to American national security.

Joe Cirincione

President, Ploughshares Fund; Author, 'Nuclear Nightmares: Securing the World Before It Is Too Late'

I could write you all the details of the high-pitched screams, the hitting, pinching and the pushing (all in the back seat), but that would be way too overwhelming and annoying.

Tosha Schore, M.A.

Teaching parents how to handle those rip-out-your-hair parenting moments.

I'm angry. As a woman film blogger, I need twice as much effort and talent to get a quarter of the recognition that my male counterparts receive. I notice it on a daily basis and I've grown to really hate it.

His behavior since July has provided strong evidence that he not only doesn't care about bipartisan support for Israel but, rather, is actively working to swing Jewish support to the Republicans while virtually writing off, even deliberately alienating, traditionally pro-Israel liberal Democrats.

Paul Scham

Associate Research Professor of Israel Studies and Executive Director of the Gildenhorn Institute for Israel Studies at the University of Maryland

Israel's multiple fault lines -- secular vs. religious, Jewish vs. Palestine and controversial calls for a boycott of the Jewish state -- are exploding on the soccer pitch.

James Dorsey

Senior fellow, S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies

One could hardly blame liberal Jews for wanting to celebrate AIPAC's defeat or for some Israeli's to lament what they called "Netanyahu's strategic blunder". Both views, however, are nave and shortsighted. On several levels, Netanyahu won.

James Zogby

President, Arab American Institute; author, 'Arab Voices'

My daughter, my eldest child, just had her first child-- a baby boy. They live in Israel, and I flew over for his birth and to help afterwards. What w...

Dawn Q Landau

Mother, Writer, Traveler, Treasure Hunter and Sushi lover. Dawn was named a BlogHer "Voices of the Year" for 2015 and writes regularly on her blog: Tales From the Motherland.

Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee's August campaign trip to Israel challenged longstanding U.S. policy towards Israel and the Palestinian territories.

Read more:
Israel: Pictures, Videos, Breaking News - Huffington Post

Category: Jewish American Heritage Month | Comments Off on Israel: Pictures, Videos, Breaking News – Huffington Post
Tags:

Posted By admin on September 11, 2015

The Obama administration's hopes for Syrian President Bashar Assad to step aside and make way for a democratic government in Damascus are being dashed once again -- this time, by evidence that the dictator's strongest ally is joining the fight to keep him in power.

According to multiple reports, Russian troops are on the ground to aid Assad forces battling Islamic State militants.

To make matters worse, the Obama administration's push to train and equip a moderate rebel force has failed to get off the ground. The developments are, in turn, fueling criticism of the U.S. effort to bring peace to the long-running civil war.

"The whole region is in chaos," Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., told Fox News on Thursday.

The State Department has warned that Russia's latest involvement in Syria could "further escalate the conflict" and "risk confrontation with the anti-ISIL Coalition operating in Syria."

But Moscow appears to have ignored that warning, despite a second call in five days from Secretary of State John Kerry to his counterpart in Russia expressing "concerns" about the "buildup."

Reuters now reports that the Russian forces, according to Lebanese sources, are participating in military operations to boost Assad troops. Israel's defense minister also said Thursday that Russian troops are in Syria to help Assad fight ISIS, and could be looking to launch jets and combat helicopters, the Associated Press reported.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov acknowledged at a news conference Thursday that Moscow indeed is sending military equipment, which he said falls under "existing contracts." He said Russia "will continue aiding the Syrian government in equipping the Syrian army with all that is necessary for it to prevent a repetition in Syria of the Libyan scenario and other sad events that have occurred in this region, because of an obsession by some of our western partners with ideas of changing unwanted regimes.''

Russia earlier acknowledged it has military experts on the ground, but had not addressed the scope of that effort.

U.S. officials also tell Fox News the Pentagon has observed several Russian military cargo flights into Syria -- to date, the Pentagon has seen seven An-124 "Condor" flights to an airbase outside of Latakia, a port city on the Mediterranean, Fox News is told.

A separate official confirmed that two Russian Navy tank landing ships moored in Tartus -- where the Russians have a naval base -- in the past few days, offloading armored vehicles as well as nearly 50 Russian marines.

Asked what the U.S. military planned to do about the Russian buildup, the official said, "nothing."

It's unclear how far Russia is preparing to go to boost Assad, but one U.S. official told Fox News the presence there is "unprecedented."

"This is definitely a build-up straight out of Russia's military doctrine," one official said.

The development comes as the Obama administration's effort to train and equip a moderate rebel fighting force in Syria falters.

The Pentagon says it has spent nearly $42 million -- out of $500 million allocated by Congress -- to train a total of 54 fighters so far.

But Politico reported Thursday that all those fighters are now either dead, captured or missing. Asked by Fox News how many of the 54 the Pentagon could account for, a Pentagon spokesman did not answer directly, saying only that they've "been candid that the initial phase of this program did not lift off with the kind of efficiency that we'd hoped."

The spokesman added that "supporting these moderate Syrian forces is a critical component in the fight going forward."

Without a credible moderate rebel force operating inside Syria, though, Assad is potentially poised to strengthen his position, now that the Russians are involved. Despite the Obama administration's fizzled "red line" threat over Assad's chemical weapons use and declarations that he needs to relinquish power, Assad's most powerful opponent remains the Islamic State and other terror groups -- which the United States also is fighting.

McCain said the Russians are moving to "prop up" Assad and argued the Syrian strongman is surviving with the help of allies like Moscow and Tehran.

"That's the only thing that's keeping Bashar Assad in power," he told Fox News on Thursday.

He faulted the Obama administration for both withdrawing forces from Iraq and not doing more from the start to get rid of Assad, saying this fueled the rise of ISIS.

"When we create that vacuum, then it is filled by evil," McCain said.

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., a Republican presidential candidate, also told Fox News that the administration should have helped the Free Syrian Army three years ago by establishing a no-fly zone -- "when it would have mattered."

Even Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton critiqued the Syria policy. "We have to bring sufficient pressure on Assad to force a political solution in Syria, including a meaningful increase in our efforts to train and equip the moderate Syrian opposition, something I called for early in the conflict," Clinton, the former secretary of state, said Wednesday in Washington.

State Department spokesman John Kirby told reporters Wednesday that Kerry is warning his Russian counterpart, Lavrov, that Russia is fueling instability in the country where a four-year civil war has claimed 250,000 lives.

"[Kerry] reiterated our concern about these reports of Russian military activities -- or buildup, if you will -- in Syria and made very clear our view that [it] ... could lead to greater violence and more -- even more instability in Syria," Kirby said.

Fox News' Lucas Tomlinson and Jennifer Griffin contributed to this report.

See original here:
Russian troops reportedly join Syria fight, prop up ...

Category: Uncategorized | Comments Off on Russian troops reportedly join Syria fight, prop up …
Tags:

Posted By admin on September 11, 2015

Last Updated: 06/09/15 4:13pm

Wales striker Gareth Bale runs over to the bench after scoring against Cyprus

Wales can seal their place at a major tournament for the first time in 58 years with victory against Israel on Sunday.

Chris Coleman's side head into their Euro 2016 qualifier at the Cardiff City Stadium on the brink of ending more than half a century of heartache away from world football's biggest stages.

The hosts enter the game in buoyant mood after Gareth Bale's 82nd-minute header sealed victory in Cyprus, and they will be looking to build on that display, as well as their positive performance in their last game in Cardiff, where they defeated Belgium.

Israel also have automatic qualification ambitions after a 4-0 win over Andorra on Thursday kept them in touch with the top two in Group B.

Eli Guttman's side are just two points behind second-placed Belgium and will be out to atone for their 3-0 home defeat to Wales when the sides met back in March.

Team news

After arriving back from Cyprus on Friday, Wales are not expected to make too many changes against Israel.

Midfielder Joe Ledley has been forced to pull out with a hamstring injury so Nottingham Forest's David Vaughan has been called up to the squad.

Israel will be without a number of regulars due to injury, including Lior Refaelov, Rami Gershon, Sheran Yeini and Omer Damari.

Stats

Wales are aiming to qualify for their first major tournament since the 1958 World Cup.

Wales are unbeaten in a record nine competitive games (W6 D3) going back to September 2013.

Bale's header secured Wales' victory over Cyprus which leaves them one win away from securing European qualification

Gareth Bale has either scored or assisted eight of Wales' nine goals in 2016 European Qualifiers (six goals, two assists).

Wales have kept five clean sheets in their six Qualifiers, including their last four, but they have never gone five successive internationals without conceding.

Israel are looking to qualify for their first major tournament since the 1970 World Cup in Mexico.

Betting

Sky Bet make Wales odds-on shots to secure the three points they need against Israel (18/5) to book a place in the Euro 2016 finals.

Chris Coleman's men lead Belgium by three points and are 1/3 to qualify as Group B winners with Belgium 2/1 shots to overhaul them.

Gareth Bale scored the winner against Cyprus last week and the Real Madrid man has been Price Boosted to 9/4 to net in a home win while Aaron Ramsey is 8/1 (from 6/1) to open the scoring.

Watch live coverage of Wales v Israel on Sky Sports 1 HD from 4.30pm on Sunday.

Read the original post:
Match Preview - Wales vs Israel | 06 Sep 2015

Category: Uncategorized | Comments Off on Match Preview – Wales vs Israel | 06 Sep 2015
Tags:

Posted By simmons on September 10, 2015

Welcome to Palestine

With a history that envelops more than one million years, Palestine has played an important role in human civilisation. The crucible of prehistoric cultures, it is where settled society, the alphabet, religion, and literature developed, and would become a meeting place for diverse cultures and ideas that shaped the world we know today. Its rich and diverse past, abundant cultural heritage, and the archaeological and religious sites of the three monotheistic faiths including the birthplace of Jesus Christ, make Palestine a unique centre of world history.Continue reading

Round up the best of Palestine the holy shrines, the historical treasures, the hospitality, the folklore, the hiking, the biking, the culture, the handicrafts, the food, the beer and you have the building blocks for one of the most interesting journeys youll ever take. While so many things in Palestine are interesting, some things are better defined as surprising! Weve selected a collection of Palestines Most Interesting for First-timers Continue reading

Most first-time visitors to Palestine will stick to highlights like the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem, the Old City and Mount of Olives in Jerusalem, and Tel Es-Sultan and Quarantine in Jericho. But for those that have been to Continue reading

People choosing to explore pedal power can enjoy tracks in an enchanted landscape rich in history; immersed in the breathtaking Biblical landscape, taking the ancient roads from the quiet of the Jerusalem Wilderness desert to the majesty of the Dead Continue reading

Accommodations are not hard to find in Palestine, for Palestine is a place where hospitality is a way of living. Whether you are a comfort traveler or an economic one, Palestinian cities boast an array of hotels and guesthouses as tourists and pilgrims are frequent in this beautiful country.

Find accommodation

Like Loading...

See the rest here:
TRAVEL PALESTINE | The Official Site for Tourism in Palestine

Category: Jewish American Heritage Month | Comments Off on TRAVEL PALESTINE | The Official Site for Tourism in Palestine
Tags:

Posted By simmons on September 10, 2015

According to data compiled by The Jewish Agency for Israel and the Ministry of Aliyah and Immigrant Absorption, some 29,500 immigrants arrived in Israel in the Jewish year 5775, representing a 13% increase over the 26,000 who came in 5774.

Most of this years immigrants came from the former Soviet Union (some 14,100, compared to 10,800 last year) and Europe (more than 9,000, compared to 8,400 last year). Some 3.600 immigrants came to Israel from North America (similar to last years number) and 1,200 came from South America (a modest increase compared to last year).

The two largest sources of aliyah were France, with 7,350 immigrants compared to 6,700 in 5774 (a 10% increase), and Ukraine, with 6,900 immigrants compared to 4,600 last year (a 50% increase).

The Jewish Agency and the Ministry of Aliyah and Immigrant Absorption have been running programs in both countries in order to encourage aliyah and remove barriers to the immigrants integration in Israeli society. Aliyah from Russia also saw a significant 23% increase with the arrival of some 5,900 immigrants this year compared to 4,800 in 5774.

Also in Europe, some 690 immigrants arrived in Israel from the United Kingdom (a 13% increase when compared to the 612 who came last year), some 400 from Italy (a 30% increase, compared to 300 last year), and 290 from Belgium (similar to last years figure).

Immigrants to Israel came from 97 countries across the world. One immigrant each came from Andorra, Angola, Namibia, Paraguay, the Philippines, and Slovakia.

The Chairman of the Executive of The Jewish Agency for Israel, Natan Sharansky, said: For the past few years, the majority of immigrants to Israel have been coming from free and democratic Western countries. These immigrants free choice to live in Israel, and their preference for Israel over other countries, is the true triumph of Zionism.

Minister of Aliyah and Immigrant Absorption Zeev Elkin added: These figures, which show a significant increase in the number of immigrants to Israel, reinforce the overall picture that the year 2015 will represent a year of record aliyah for more than a decade. We estimate that, at this rate, by the end of the civil year we will reach between 30,000 and 35,000 immigrants. This is a window of opportunity that the State of Israel cannot miss. Therefore, we at the Ministry of Aliyah and Immigrant Absorption, the government, and Israeli society in general are faced with a fascinating and compelling challenge, to both ensure that immigrants who arrive in Israel are well integrated and do whatever we can to increase activities to encourage aliyah.

Thousands of the new immigrants to Israel are young college graduates who came via specially created programs run by The Jewish Agency and the Ministry of Aliyah and Immigrant Absorption. Some 3,000 of the new immigrants work in engineering and technology, and more than 1,000 are doctors and other medical professionals. Some 70% of the new arrivals are under the age of 44, including some 7,800 who are 19 or younger and some 12,000 between the ages of 20 and 44.

As in previous years, the bulk of immigrants came during the summer, which saw the arrival of some 8,350 immigrants compared to the 7,160 who came last year (a 17% increase).

The three most popular destinations in Israel were Tel Aviv-Yafo, which welcomed some 3,500 new immigrants, the coastal city of Netanya with 3,400, and Jerusalem, which some 3,000 new immigrants made their home in 5775.

See the original post:
Aliyah is Up: 29,500 Immigrants Arrived in Israel in 5775

Category: Jewish American Heritage Month | Comments Off on Aliyah is Up: 29,500 Immigrants Arrived in Israel in 5775
Tags: