Thanks for the link Carol, unfortunately the dates given do not tally for the events described in their account.

Al-Husseini was appointed as Mufti of Jerusalem in 1921, on the death of the previous incumbent. It was one year later, in 1922, that he was appointed to the Muslim High Council. Between 1921 and 1929 Al-Husseini did much to restore the main muslim shrines in Jerusalem, the records of this work, which involved dealings with other notaries in the Arab and muslim world refer to Al-Husseini as the Mufti of Jerusalem. The title Grand Mufti was one that Al-Husseini took upon himself, he was not appointed as such by the British.

Frank,

"I don't believe belicose threats should be ignored but taken in context with proper intelligence."

"But to act pre-emptively on such measely information is
the action of a "loose cannon"."

"The truth is if the assaults that were so loudly proclaimed from certain Arab quarters were in fact a real threat, there would be substantial military intelligence to back it up."

Between the 15th of May and the 5th of June, 1967. Egypt, Syria and Jordan parked 250,000 men under arms, 2000 tanks and 700 combat aircraft on Israel's borders. They did this in conjunction with their political leaders and press proclaiming in no uncertain terms that their intention was to wipe the State of Israel from the face of the earth. They did this in conjunction with closing an international water-way to Israeli shipping and vessels from other countries trading with Israel.

Under such circumstances what in your opinion, Frank, would constitute "proper intelligence"? I, certainly, would not regard such military dispositions, public announcements and political moves as representing anything that could be classified as "measely". Exactly what does constitute a "real threat" in your opinion Frank?   

"The USSR was not going to get involved in that regardless of
the rhetoric."

The response of the USSR to any US involvement in the situation, Frank, was very clearly stated, that is a matter of record within the UN.

"The ability to mount such an attack wasn't there."

The armed forces arrayed against Israel, at the time Frank, were massive in relation to the force that Israel could muster for her defence. What in your opinion would have constituted the "ability to mount" an attack? 500,000 men? 3500 tanks? 1500 combat aircraft? That's roughly what the USSR had stationed in Europe, Frank, and NATO kept on the alert, and fully aware of their presence, for a period of damn near fifty years. Those forces stayed in the garrison positions Frank, they were rightly regarded by the west as posing a threat just by being there. That's without the USSR making daily threats about eradicating, exterminating and annihilating any of the sovereign states of western Europe.

"It seems to me if there was going to be an assault on Israel, it would be quietly executed without verbal fanfare."

You mean like they did in 1973 Frank? By which time they'd learned their lesson from 1967. The fact that they screwed it up in 1967 in no way detracts from either their ability or their intent.

On both proposed partition settlements your assumption that somehow the British (then latterly the UN) got in the way is correct. It always is the burden of those trying to broker any sort of compromise between sides unwilling to compromise.

The British proposal was for two states the two Jewish parts linked by a controlled corridor, Jerusalem to be declared an international city, belonging to neither. Abullah accepted this and the kingdom of Jordan was established, the Palestinians did not, becasue no Jewish occupation of the land was acceptable, which I suppose Frank is a fairly relevant extenuating reason for rejection. Relevant from their point of view, but neither realistic or reasonable.

In answer to your question, "Which Arabs are we talking about Syrians, Palestinians, Jordanians or whom?" We are talking about the Arabs of the region Frank, prior to the break-up of the Ottoman Empire, there were no Syrians, Iraqis, Jordanians, Saudis, etc.

Subsequent to the 1973, Yom Kippur War, Israel held bi-lateral talks with its neighbours, Jordan, Egypt and Lebanon came to agreement. Syria came tantalizingly close to agreement but still elludes the process. The agreements are fragile and difficult for those "Arab " countries involved because it is difficult for their populations to rationalise how their governments, who for the last forty years have been demonizing the Jews in Israel can suddenly make such agreements. I have yet to hear similar statements come out of Israel, they denounce the terrorists and accuse the foreign governments that give them assistance, but I have yet to hear any threat on the part of Israel to "wipe out" any of its neighbours, Ihave yet to hear any threat on the part of the Israeli government to wipe out the Palestinians.

In 1967, Israel's pre-emptive strike that removed the Egyptian airforce from the equation, far from risking WW III, went a long way to ensuring that the situation did not escalate into a wider and far more serious conflict. The fact that there was not one speaks for itself.