Below (maybe, digitally for the first time) is Winston Churchill’s statement endorsing the UK/France/Israeli invasion of Egypt October-November 1956. Churchill is clearly in favour of the conspiracy by claiming it was all Egypt’s fault that Israel is invading it. The invasion left the UK and France with no option but to “restore peace”. Churchill’s pack of lies was made to his constituents and printed in the Guardian on the 5th November 1956.
In the inter-war years Churchill was known as an advocate of using mustard gas on Arabs and Kurds to quell rebellions against the British Empire. He had supported the colonisation of Palestine with European Jews at the expense of the indigenous population in a genocidal manner,
“I do not admit that the dog in the manger has the final right to the manger, even though he may have lain there for there for a very long time…I do not admit, for instance, that a great wrong has been done to the Red Indians of America, or the black people of Australia…”
But to his constituents he refers to British history in the region as an endeavour to “confer on them the benefits of justice and freedom from internecine wars.” Continue reading
As the bombs rain on Gaza, the latest edition of the New Statesman magazine, Great Britain’s main weekly centre-left magazine, defined the Palestinian struggle against Zionist colonisation and aggression as a “conflict between two peoples destined to claim ownership of the same land.”
The editorial obviously doesn’t enunciate how and why it became the ‘destiny’ of Palestinians to have been ethnically cleansed from their land and killed in their thousands (i.e. “conflict”) in what was initially a British imperialist project. But the New Statesman’s editorial in November 1917 endorsing the Balfour Declaration certainly does shed an incredible dose of light on how this destiny materialised. Continue reading
For the average British pro-Palestinian human rights activist, the Balfour Declaration, published ninety- five years ago on the 2nd November 1917, is only mentioned in passing in their publications or agitations. For them, the declaration seems to have drafted in, one autumn day most likely alongside the brown and crimson leaves for then to triumphantly and jubilantly land on Lord Balfour’s, the British foreign secretary, desk. For them, it is more convenient to strongly imply that the Palestinian predicament began when the young United Nations partitioned Palestine on the 29th November 1947 or when the British Empire’s Palestine mandate officially ended on 15th May 1948. For them, the fact that up to 400,000 Palestinians under the Empire’s watch were ethnically cleansed between these latter two dates literally doesn’t warrant a footnote.
This is certainly the impression given by reading the literature of “revolutionary socialists” as well as other supposedly pro-Palestinians. In his book “Imperialism and Resistance”, “revolutionary socialist” John Rees argues Continue reading