• Type:
  • Genre:
  • Duration:
  • Average Rating:

Month: July 2017

The 1956 Suez Crisis and the end of the British Empire

After World War 2, Britain was faced with growing demand for the removal of British troops from Egypt.

But in 1946 there were, in fact, still over 100,000 British troops in the country. Their presence was bitterly resented.

As far as the British were concerned, the military bases in the Canal Zone were of vital importance and the scale of the commitment was enormous.

The network of bases occupied 750 square miles and was, according to one historian, “the world’s most elaborate military complex”

What began as low-level guerrilla attacks by locals on British troops escalated into violence. British responded by shelling Egyptian villages in response to increasing attacks.

On 23 July 1952 a secret society organised within the Egyptian army, the Free Officers, staged a coup that overthrew Farouk.

The coup took place with the full support of the CIA and, according to one account, the Americans promised the conspirators that they would prevent the British from intervening on Farouk’s behalf.

As far as the Americans were concerned, a modernising dictatorship aligned with the US was the way forward and they supported the Egyptians in negotiations over the Canal Zone.

For the British, Egyptian demands remained totally unacceptable.

Churchill, the prime minister, in particular, regarded it as outrageous that Britain could no longer dictate terms to an inferior people for whom he had the utmost contempt.

On one occasion he told Anthony Eden that he should tell the Egyptians ““that if we had any more of their cheek we will set the Jews on them and drive them into the gutter from which they should never have emerged”.

Without American support, however, the British no longer had the ability to impose their will on the Egyptians.

On 27 July 1954 the Churchill government finally concluded an agreement to evacuate British troops from Egypt by 18 June 1956.

It was a humiliating retreat, surrendering control of territory the size of Wales to the despised Egyptians. It was a humiliation that rankled.

Even after the 1954 Settlement the British could not accept the notion of Egyptian independence.

The nationalisation of the Suez Canal by Gamal was another blow to British prestige.

While covert efforts were already under way to overthrow both Nasser and the Syrian government (“Operation Straggle”), there was now a pretext for a full-scale military intervention to take back the Canal.

The Americans were not interested in helping to bolster British power in the Middle East.

In an act of desperation by a government that believed the British position in the Middle East was lost unless some dramatic stroke could rescue it.

Eden entered into secret discussions with the French and Israelis that eventually resulted in the Sèvres Protocol of 24 October 1956.

Under the terms of an illegal conspiracy, Israel would attack Egypt, whereupon Britain and France, posing as peacemakers, would demand that both sides withdraw from the Suez Canal area.

The British state no longer had either the financial or the military strength for such demonstrations, but the Britsh refused to face up to this.

The Israelis launched their surprise attack on Egyptian positions in Sinai and the Anglo-French ultimatum was presented to both sides the following day.

The Egyptians rejected the ultimatum and the British bombers began their attacks.

The actual invasion began with paratroop landings followed by a seaborne assault on Port Said but the following day the British and the French agreed to a ceasefire aborting the plan.

The decisive factor in the ceasefire was the hostile stance taken by the United States.

Eisenhower reacted to the invasion with fury. The Americans were not prepared to tolerate independent action on this scale on the part of the British.

Not only did they not want any revival of British power and influence in the Middle East, but they were afraid that Britain’s old-fashioned imperialism would play into the hands of the Russians.

Accordingly, the United States took the lead in condemning the invasion and backed this up with financial and oil sanctions.

This forced the British to accept a ceasefire without any of their political or military objectives having been gained.

British troops finally withdrew on 22 December 1956. This defeat of the British is argued as the death knell to Britain’s status as the leading power.

References

The Blood Never Dried: A People’s History of the British Empire –  John Newsinger
A Modern Day History of Middle East – William Cleveland
The Game Player: Confessions of the CIA’s Original Political Operative – Miles Copeland
Secret Affairs: Britain’s Collusion with Radical Islam  Mark Curtis

Omar Mukhtar – The Lion of the Desert

In 1911, Italy took Libya from the Ottoman Caliphate and formed the colonies of Cyrenaica and Tripolitania

In North Africa, the leaders of the Senusiyyah, joined forces with the Ottomans and used all their strength to start up a new resistance against the French and Italian colonial invasion.

The Libyan national struggle against Italy was led by Omar Mukhtar, a Senussi Sufi teacher

Omar Mukhtar was born in eastern Cyrenaica, Al Butnan District, in the village of East Janzur east of Tobruk.

He had studied at an earlier Senussi university, in the town of Al-Jaghbub, the main Senussi redoubt, on the Libyan border with Egypt.

A teacher of the Qur’an by profession, Mukhtar was also skilled in the strategies and tactics of desert warfare.

He knew local geography well and used that knowledge to advantage in battles against the Italians,

Mukhtar repeatedly led his small, highly alert groups in successful attacks against the Italians,

Mukhtar’s men skillfully attacked outposts, ambushed troops, and cut lines of supply and communication.

The Italian army was left astonished and embarrassed by his guerrilla tactics.

Omar Mukhtar led the rebellion against Italian occupation of Libya for 20 years until his capture at the old age of 70.

Mukhtar was tried, convicted, and sentenced to be executed by hanging [by Italians] in a public place.

When the judge said: “Italy’s martial law court has decided for your execution”. In response Omar Mukhtar replied: “The ruling and decision is Allah’s alone. Your fake and fabricated ruling has no worth to it… To Allah we belong and to him we shall return”.

Rome controlled Libya as a colonial possession from 1911 until the fall of fascist Italy in 1943

Indonesian Version

https://youtu.be/TbQPg4-Vcuk

CIA Paid Millions to Jordan’s King Hussein in Operation “No Beef”

February 18, 1977
The Central Intelligence Agency for 20 years has made secret annual payments totaling millions of dollars to King Hussein of Jordan, The Washington Post has learned.

The payoffs were reported last year to President Ford as an impropriety by the Intelligence Oversight Board, a three-member panel set up by Ford to curb CIA abuses.

President Ford took no steps to stop the covert payments. Last hear Hussein was paid approximately $750,000 by the CIA.

President Carter learned of the payoffs earlier this week after this newspaper began its investigation. He ordered that the payments be stopped.

The secret arrangement with Hussein had not been disclosed to Carter by the CIA or by any member of the previous administration, including President Ford, former Secretary of State Henry A. Kissinger, or former CIA Director George Bush.

Carter was “distressed” that he had not been told, according to well-placed sources, and sees the solution to CIA abuses as quick confirmation of his nominee as CIA director, Navy Adm. Stansfield Turner.

In addition, the Senate Intelligence Committee created last year to oversee the CIA apparently was not given the full story by the Ford administration of the secret payments to Hussein.

One of the most closely held and sensitive of all CIA covert activities, the payments to Hussein were made under the codeword project name of “No Beef.” They were usually delivered in cash to the king by the CIA station chief in Amman.

As justification for the direct cash payments to Hussein, the CIA claimed that Hussein was allowing U.S. intelligence agencies to operate freely in his strategically placed Middle Eastern country.

Hussein himself provided intelligence to the CIA and forwarded money from the payments to other government officials who provided intelligence or cooperated with the CIA.

Nonetheless, some CIA officials considered the payments nothing more than “bribes” and reported the matter to President Ford’s oversight panel.

Hussein, according to sources, considers the payments simply another form of U.S. assistance.

Within the CIA, the “No Beef” project has been considered one of its most successful operations, giving the United States great leverage and unusual access to the leader of a sovereign state.

The payments were first made to Hussein in 1957 during the Eisenhower administration. The initial payments apparently ran in the millions of dollars but they were sharply curtailed to the $750,000 level last year.

Hussein was only 21 when he first became a beneficiary of CIA funds. It was a time when Jordan was virtually a ward of the United States and Hussein had little money to support his lifestyle, which earned him the reputation as a “playboy prince.”

Hussein has a well-publicized taste for sports cars and airplanes. As once previously reported, the CIA has provided Hussein with female companions. The agency also provided bodyguards for Hussein’s children when they were abroad in school.

Some money from the most recent CIA payments to Hussein have been used to pay for bodyguards for his children.

Over the years, Hussein has maintained friendly relations with the United States and his country has been the recipient of substantial military and economic aid – about $200 million in loans and grants last year alone.

The “No Beef” payments to Hussein were made outside the conventional channel of military and economic assistance.

Well-placed sources said that nonetheless the United States has not been able to direct Hussein’s overall policy decisions. He has not been a “puppet,” the sources said, but he has rarely drifted outside the U.S. orbit.

In late 1974 the CIA became the focus of several government investigations into alleged abuses, and in February, 1976, President Ford directed a reorganization of the intelligence community.

Part of a Feb. 18, 1976, executive order set up the Intelligence Oversight Board which, among other things, was to “report in a timely manner to the President any activities that raise serious questions about propriety.”

The office of the general counsel in the CIA was assigned by the exectuve order to report any alleged abuses to the oversight panel.

The general counsel soon made such a report on the Hussein payments, and called them possibly improper.

The panel appointed by Ford included former Under Secretary of State Robert D. Murphy, former Secretary of the Army Stephen Ailes, and business book publisher Leo Cherne.

By last summer the oversight panel had made a formal report to President Ford on the payments, concluding that they were improper. Ford read the report but ordered no action taken.

Secretary of State Cyrus R. Vance is scheduled to meet with King Hussein today during Vance’s six-nation trip to the Middle East.

Jordan is widely considered a moderating influence on the Palestinians and a key to any lasting Middle East peace settlement.

The country is considered a vital part of any realistic option for getting the Palestinians represented at a future Geneva peace conference.

Geographically, Jordan is in a central position, sharing borders with Israel, Syria, Iraq, and Saudi Arabia. Israel’s entire eastern border touches Jordan.

Hussein’s decisions have often been highly compatible with U.S. and Israeli interests. For example, he expelled the Palestine Liberation Organization from Jordan in 1970, though this also helped Hussein’s own domestic situation.

In 1973, Hussein refused to join in the Arab war against Israel.

It is often considered a miracle that Hussein has held power for 24 years through the turbulence of the Middle East wars, frequent internal strife and at least a dozen assassination attempts.

Last week his wife, Queen Alia, 26, died in a helicopter crash while returning from a hospital mercy mission.

Gone Nawaz Sharif Gone

Don’t forget to subscribe to our YouTube Channel

Become a KJ Patreon so we can produce more and better content
https://www.patreon.com/kjvids

Sign up to our website and submit video suggestions:
www.kjvids.co.uk

Like our Facebook page for exclusive updates:
https://www.facebook.com/KJVids

Follow us on Instagram for our one minute vids:
https://www.instagram.com/kjvids2016

Follow us on Twitter to be informed when we post:
https://twitter.com/kjvids2016

Suez Canal: 5 Swift Facts

1. Naploeon intended to build the Suez Canal

After conquering Egypt in 1798, Napoleon Bonaparte sent a team of surveyors to investigate the possibility of building the canal from the Red Sea to the Mediterranean. But his scouts incorrectly concluded that the Red Sea was at least 33 feet higher than the Mediterranean and any attempt to create a canal, could result in catastrophic flooding across the Nile Delta. The surveyors’ false calculations were enough to scare Napoleon away from the project, and plans for a canal stalled until 1847, when a team of researchers finally confirmed that there was no serious difference in altitude between the sea’s. Read More,

2. The Statue of Liberty was originally intended for the canal

As the Canal neared completion in 1869, French sculptor Frédéric-Auguste Bartholdi tried to convince Ferdinand and the Egyptian government to build a sculpture called “Egypt Bringing Light to Asia” as the canals entrance. Figure, he envisioned a 90-foot-tall statue of a woman clothed in Egyptian robes and holding a torch, which would also serve as a lighthouse to guide ships into the canal. The project was never finalized, but Bartholdi continued searching for the right idea and place for his statue, and in 1886 he finally unveiled a completed version in New York Harbor. Officially called “Liberty Enlightening the World” (Also known as the Statue of Liberity.) Read More.

3. A fleet of ships was stranded in the canal for more than eight years

During June 1967’s Six Day War between Egypt and Israel, the Suez Canal was shut down by the government and blocked on either side by mines and scuttled/destroyed ships. At the time of the closure, 15 international shipping vessels were at the canal’s midpoint at the Great Bitter Lake. They would remain stranded in the waterway for eight years, eventually earning the nickname the “Yellow Fleet” for the sand that covered their decks. Most of the crewmembers were rotated on and off the stranded vessels on 3-month assignments, but the rest passed the time by forming a floating community and hosting sporting and social events. As the years passed, the fleet even developed its own stamps and internal system of trade. The 15 marooned ships were finally allowed to leave the canal in 1975. By then, only two of the 15 Ships were still seaworthy enough to make their way back home. Read More.

4. Suez Canal makes $5billion a year

In 2016 Egypt’s Suez Canal revenues were $5.005 billion. In March and April 2017 alone, Egypt’s revenue from the Suez Canal was $853.7 million, 4.1 percent higher than the same period a year earlier, the Suez Canal Authority said in May 2017. The canal is the fastest shipping route between Europe and Asia and one of the Egyptian government’s main sources of foreign currency.

5. The canal played a crucial role in a Cold War time crisis

In 1956, the Suez Canal was at the tip of a brief war between Egypt, Britain, France and Israel. The conflict had its origins in Britain’s military occupation of the canal which had continued even after Egypt gained “independence” in 1922. Many Egyptians hated the lingering colonial influence, and tensions finally broke out over in July 1956, when the Egyptian President nationalized the Suez Canal, supposedly to help fund a dam across the Nile River. In what became known as the Suez Crisis, a combined British, Israeli and French force launched an attack on Egypt in October 1956. The Europeans succeeded in advancing to the canal, but later withdrew from Egypt in following the dark view from the United States.

20 Distressing Images of Colonialism in the Congo

 

“The Vice talked to the director of the International Slavery Museum about how the power of shocking images can put an end to colonial rule.” The original article can be found on the VICE

1904. The Congo. A man sits on a porch, staring intensely at the severed foot and hand of a child. Nsala, the man in the picture, was photographed by English missionary Alice Seeley Harris after he arrived at her mission clutching a parcel that contained what was left of his five-year-old daughter. She’d been killed and dismembered as a punishment when his village failed to meet the rubber quotas demanded by the imperial regime.  (Copyright Anti-Slavery International and Autograph ABP)

Alice Seeley Harris, Manacled members of a chain gang at Bauliri. A common punishment for not paying taxes, Congo Free State, c. 1904. Courtesy Anti-Slavery International / Autograph

ABP Set of children who where used in history as plant harvesters

A group of Bongwonga rubber workers

Lomboto shot in wrist and hand by a rubber concession sentry and permanently disabled as a result, early 1900s copy.

History of Africa Colonialism, 19th century, European colonizer carried in a hammock by 4 African porters (PRISMA ARCHIVO / Alamy Stock Photo)

Children with their hands cut off for punishment Alice Seeley Harris, Congo Free State, c. 1904. Courtesy Anti-Slavery International / Autograph ABP

Alice Seeley Harris, Three head sentries of the ABIR with a prisoner, Congo Free State, c.1904. Courtesy Anti-Slavery International / Autograph ABP

Alice Seeley Harris, Isekausu whose hand was chopped off by Ikombi, one of the rubber concession’s sentries, Congo Free State, c. 1904. Courtesy Anti-Slavery International / Autograph ABP

Mutilated child – Belgian Congo – Image by Alice Seeley Harris

Local Congolese king kuba. Their own tribal chiefs prospered by offering their tribe members as slaves

Congo tribe members worked for the Belgium plantations to beat their own countrymen

Punishment in the sun

Artists Depiction of life in the Belgian congo

Alice Seeley With a group of congo men

Alice Seeley 1908, Group lined up of congo slaves

Missionaries and anti-slavery campaigners, reverend John Haris and Mrs Alice Seely- Harris camping in the Congo in the Upper Kasai.

Permenant Scars from beatings

The 2002 Indian Gujarat Massacre

On February 27, 2002, a fire ripped through a train at Godhra station in Gujarat in western India, burning 59 Hindu pilgrims alive.

Blaming Muslims for the deaths of the pilgrims, mobs of Hindus rampage, rape, loot and kill in a spasm of violence that rages for more than two months.

Mothers are skewered, children set afire and fathers hacked to pieces.

About 1,000 people, mostly Muslims, are killed. Some 20,000 Muslim homes and businesses and 360 places of worship are destroyed, and roughly 150,000 people are displaced.

The day after the train attack, for example, police officers in Ahmedabad do not arrest a single person among the tens of thousands of angry Hindus.

The cause of the train fire remains a chief area of dispute.

An angry Muslim crowd had gathered at Godhra station to protest against the taunting of Muslim porters by Hindu passengers, but they deny setting the train ablaze.

In 2005, an Indian government investigation finds that the fire was an accident and not caused by Muslims. The report is one of a number of politically competing inquiries.

During the slaughter in Ahmedabad and hundreds of other towns and villages, Hindu mobs rounded up and raped Muslim women. They poured kerosene down their throats and those of their children and threw lit matches at them.

Many eyewitness reports suggested police directed rioters to Muslim homes and also turned fleeing victims back towards their killers.

In 2007, the investigative magazine Tehelka recorded boasts from some of the ringleaders. One, Babu Bajrangi, boasted of how he slit open the womb of a pregnant woman.

It was one of the two biggest massacres during the riots — the other was in Naroda Patiya suburb, where more than 90 died.

Hindu nationalist Modi, then chief minister of Gujarat, was widely accused of turning a blind eye to the violence.

One senior policeman even testified Modi ordered officers not to intervene as the killing spread.

India’s premier has always denied wrongdoing and has never been convicted over the violence.

However, the bloody riots tarred Modi’s international image, leading him to be blacklisted for a decade by the United States and the European Union.

Official probes also absolved the state police and government of any collusion in the violence, which left 200,000 people homeless. Many Muslims never returned.

A top state official tells one investigation panel that Mr. Modi ordered officials to take no action against rioters. That official was murdered. Thousands of cases against rioters are dismissed by the police for lack of evidence despite eyewitness accounts

.

More than 100 people have been convicted over the riots in a series of trials over the past 14 years.

An Indian court in 2011 found 31 Hindus guilty of murdering 33 Muslims who were seeking shelter in a single house.

And in 2012 a former minister in Modi’s state government was handed a life sentence for her role.

Theodor Herzl – The Founder of Zionism

Theodor Herzl is the founder of the political form of Zionism, a movement to establish a Jewish homeland.

Herzl was born of well-to-do middle-class parents. To escape from an anti-Semitic atmosphere, he transferred in 1875 to a school where most of the students were Jews

A profound change began in Herzl’s life soon after a sketch he had published in the leading Viennese newspaper, Neue Freie Presse,led to his appointment as the paper’s Paris correspondent.

He arrived in Paris with his wife in the fall of 1891 and was shocked to find in the homeland of the French Revolution the same anti-Semitism with which he had become so familiar in Austria.

At the same time, his work as a newspaperman heightened his interest in political affairs and led him to the convictionthat the answer to anti-Semitism was not assimilation but organized counterefforts by the Jews.

The Dreyfus affair in France also helped crystallize this belief. French military documents had been given to German agents, and a Jewish officer named Alfred Dreyfus had been falsely charged with the crime.

The ensuing political controversy produced an outburst of anti-Semitism among the French public. Herzl said in later years that it was the Dreyfus affairthat had made a Zionist out of him.

So long as anti-Semitism existed, assimilation would be impossible, and the only solution for the majority of Jews would be organized emigration to a state of their own.

His pamphlet The Jewish State (1896) proposed that the Jewish question was a political question to be settled by a world council of nations.

He organized a world congress of Zionists that met in Basel, Switzerland, in August1897 and became first president of the World Zionist Organization,

Herzl was not the first to conceive of a Jewish state. Orthodox Jews had traditionally invokedthe return to Zion in their daily prayers.

In 1799 Napoleonhad thought of establishing a Jewish state in the ancient lands of Israel.

The English statesman Benjamin Disraeli, a Jew, had written a Zionist novel,

Moses Hess, had published an important book, Rom und Jerusalem(1862), in which he declared the restoration of a Jewish state a necessity both for the Jews and for the rest of humanity.

Although Herzl died more than 40 years before the establishment of the State of Israel, he was an indefatigableorganizer, propagandist, and diplomat who had much to do with making Zionism into a political movement of worldwide significance.

 

Top 5 Facts about Nawaz Sharif

Nawaz Sharifin full Muhammad Nawaz Sharif (born December 25, 1949, Lahore, Pakistan), is a Pakistani businessman and politician who became prime minister in 2013, having previously served as prime minister in 1990–93 and 1997–98.

1. Nawaz Sharif is the first person to be elected to the office of Prime Minister three times

Previously a restriction was in place that barred any candidate from holding public office for more than two terms. The last time Nawaz Sharif was in office was 13 years, 7 months and 21 days ago. His government back then was toppled in a bloodless coup led by the Army Chief at the time, General Pervez Musharraf on 12th October 1999. Read More

2. Nawaz Sharif owns one of Pakistans largest companies ‘Ittefaq Industries’

During the 1980s, Ittefaq Group expanded from five mills to 30 businesses which produced steel, sugar, paper, and textiles and annual revenues were estimated at $400 million. Read More

3. In 1998 Nawaz sharif was offered $5Billion (USD) to not carry out nuclear weapons tests

In 1998 Nawaz sharif was offered $5Billion (USD) to not carry out nuclear weapons tests that where proposed after India’s own nuclear tests few days prior. In 2017 Sharif said “I would have taken $5 billion from the US for not carrying out nuclear tests if I were not loyal to the country” Read More

4. Nawaz Sharif was not allowed to talk/speak during Trump’s big Saudi summit

During the meeting in Saudi arabia with Donald trump and the Saudi King in May 2017, Nawaz Sharif was not allowed to talk/speak during the summit, a report issued in ‘The Nation’ stated. “The Pakistan PM wasn’t permitted to converse at the occasion, even as heads of some small nations propose their views on violence” Read More/Watch KJ Video Report

5. Nawaz Sharif is embroiled in the ongoing Panama Papers corruption scandal which has been described as the most publicized in Pakistan’s history

Nawaz Sharif is embroiled in the ongoing Panama Papers corruption scandal which has been described as the most publicized in Pakistan’s history, The documents, sourced from Panamanian law firm Mossack Fonseca, included details of eight offshore companies with links to the family of Nawaz Sharif, his brother Shehbaz Sharif, and three of his children.

The 1953 Iranian CIA Coup Détat

Western firms had for decades controlled the region’s oil wealth, whether Arabian-American Oil Company in Saudi Arabia, or the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company in Iran.

But in 1951, a fierce nationalist ruler, Mohammed Mossadegh came to prominence and began attacks on British oil companies operating in his country, calling for expropriation and nationalization of the oil fields

His actions brought him into conflict with the pro-Western elites of Iran and the Shah, Mohammed Reza Pahlevi.

Indeed, the Shah dismissed Mossadeq in mid-1952, but massive public riots condemning the action forced the Shah to reinstate Mossadeq a short time later

U.S. officials watched events in Iran with growing suspicion. British intelligence sources, working with the American Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), came to the conclusion that Mossadeq had communist leanings and would move Iran into the Soviet orbit if allowed to stay in power

Working with Shah, the CIA and British intelligence began to engineer a plot to overthrow Mossadeq.

The Iranian premier, however, got wind of the plan and called his supporters to take to the streets in protest. At this point, the Shah left the country for “medical reasons.”

Working with pro-Shah forces and, most importantly, the Iranian military, the CIA cajoled, threatened, and bribed its way into influence and helped to organize another coup attempt against Mossadeq.

On August 19, 1953, the military, backed by street protests organized and financed by the CIA, overthrew Mossadeq.

The Shah quickly returned to take power and, as thanks for the American help, signed over 40 percent of Iran’s oil fields to U.S. companies.

Mossadeq was arrested, served three years in prison, and died under house arrest in 1967.

The Shah became one of America’s most trusted Cold War allies, and U.S. economic and military aid poured into Iran during the 1950s, 1960s, and 1970s.

In 1978, however, anti-Shah and anti-American protests broke out in Iran and the Shah was toppled from power in 1979.

 

Scroll to top