Newly-released Documents Reveal how Israel Tried To Conceal East Jerusalem's Annexation in 1967

[NewsFeed]

ed note–please pay close attention to some of the details contained within this piece as it offers basically a one-size-fits-all template as to how Judea, Inc goes about its plans of theft and then how she plays with words, ideas, and concepts (lies) in order to deal with any blowback that ensues.

Three weeks after the Six Day War Israel enacted laws to annex the conquered East Jerusalem, but tried to hide the move from the international community, according to recently revealed documents.

The Foreign Ministry sent a telegram to Israel’s ambassadors around the world instructing them to describe the annexation laws as “municipal fusion,” intended to enable running services properly.

The telegram, together with many other documents, was exposed recently by the Akevot Institute, which uses archive material to advance human rights. This wasn’t the only case in which Israel tried to conceal its acts in East Jerusalem for fear of the International community’s response, according to the documents.

Two of the laws passed on June 27, 1967 pertained to government, legal and municipal procedures, while a third was about protecting holy sites.

A day before the Knesset debate on the proposals, Israel’s ambassadors received a telegram guiding them on how to deal with the issue.

“In view of the situation in the (UN) assembly, our public diplomacy [hasbara, in the Hebrew original] must stress the law regarding the holy sites and conceal the first two,” the telegram said. But its writer wasn’t optimistic. “It’s not clear to what extent we’ll succeed in doing so,” he wrote, and recommended presenting the annexation as “a practical necessity stemming from the desire to run the whole city properly. It is not to be described as an annexation but as a municipal fusion, which will enable operating services regularly, such as water, electricity, public medicine, welfare and education. If asked you can confirm that the currency in the whole city will be Israeli.”

Israel was well aware of the precedent set in 1957, when it retreated from Sinai (after the Suez Crisis, also known as Operation Kadesh or the Sinai War), says historian Dr. Amnon Ramon of the Jerusalem Institute for Policy Research. “Then, despite Ben Gurion’s declarations of the Third Kingdom of Israel, Israel was forced to withdraw due to the ultimatum issued by the two superpowers.”

In 1967, in contrast to a decade earlier, the Americans agreed not to give Israel an ultimatum to withdraw. However, they made it clear that they would not accept unilateral moves in Jerusalem. This is clearly reflected in cabinet protocols and correspondence.

The Foreign Ministry, headed by Abba Eban, was a key player in the attempt to block, delay and conceal Israel’s acts in Jerusalem. Ramon cites the example of the head of IDF Central Command, Gen. Uzi Narkis, who had to stop a move to demolish houses in the Jewish quarter after an Armenian factory owner complained and Prime Minister Levi Eshkol told him: “Stop the d

----- snip -----


read full article at source: http://theuglytruth.wordpress.com/20...ation-in-1967/