ShortLink http://wp.me/pDB7k-11X
Did you know Israel has never been invaded by any state or non state entity and that no one has ever taken any Israeli territory?
That Israel has illegally acquired by war over 50% of the territory slated for the Arab state, non of which has ever been legally annexed?
Yet how many times have you read Israel’s demand for “defensible borders”?
Question: What gives Israel the right to have more defensible borders than its neighbours?
Israel is a UN Member State.
The Organization and its Members, in pursuit of the Purposes stated in Article 1, shall act in accordance with the following Principles.
1. The Organization is based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its Members.
It’s really quite simple… Israel has no more right to defensible borders than its neighbours. The phrase does not appear in any International Law, the UN Charter or any convention. It’s Hasbara. Twaddle.
Like the Israeli demand for Palestinian recognition of the Jewish State, Israel’s demand for more secure borders has absolutely no basis in law.
Thx Mike @ occupy911truth
First, find out what isn't true... 
talknic- thanks for the use of my “meme” and with a credit at that!
Comment by occupy911truth — February 12, 2013 @ 4:58 am
Credit where it’s due! Made me laugh :-)
Feel free to use anything from this site
Cheers
Comment by talknic — February 12, 2013 @ 9:45 am
Hi Talknic,
Is it true that most Palestinians right now, are descendants of People of Israel who stayed in the country after the destruction of the Second Jewish Temple?
http://the-engagement.org/?page_id=16
The above link said it.
Could you please check it?
Comment by Anonymous — July 31, 2012 @ 1:44 am
[Continue]
Please check this link:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11543891
As asked previously,
Please let me know if it’s true that most Palestinians right now, are descendants of People of Israel who stayed in the country after the destruction of the Second Jewish Temple.
Comment by Anonymous — July 31, 2012 @ 4:15 am
It’s of interest, but irrelevant to the Law and UN Charter, both of which exist in order to resolve issues which cannot otherwise be resolved. Israel obliged itself to adhere to both. Only the US veto vote in the UNSC prevents the law being effective.
Comment by talknic — July 31, 2012 @ 6:40 am
The DNA of the Palestinians proves (if we trust it) what we knew already, the Palestinian Arabs are the Jews from the time of Herods Temple and for some considerable time before that. Still earlier, it looks as the Canaanites were not mass-murdered, they became the Jews who became the Palestinians.
Despite the claims of some Zionists, there was no real ethnic cleansing in AD70 or AD135 (revolts against the Romans). In fact, the Mishnah, the basis of the “Jerusalem” Talmud was written c 220 AD by Judah haNasi, only some 80 years after the Bar Kockba revolt. It is a compilations of knowledge reflecting “debates between 70-200 CE by the group of rabbinic sages known as the Tannaim”. Far from being destroyed by the Romans in putting down the revolts, Judaism reached its peak right there and then. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mishnah
In fairness, I should add that the Mishna (which, with some commentary, is what became the “Jerusalem” Talmud or law-book) wasn’t written in Jerusalem, and we’re not even entirely certain it was written down immediately, it may have been passed on orally. We know it was added to by scholars of the Academies of Israel, principally in Tiberias and Caesaria. “The Babylonian Talmud” is a later version in a somewhat different language.
There is another clue that the Jews were never mass-expelled from Palestine – most place names are continuous throughout the whole period. Only in 1948 was there ethnic cleansing and entirely new names appeared. In Ha’aretz, April 4, 1969 (according to http://www.awitness.org/journal/guns_and_moses_zionist_words.html) General Moshe Dayan’s spoke to the Technion, Haifa: “We came to a region that was inhabited by Arabs, and we set up a Jewish state. … You don’t even know the names [of the previous Arab villages] and I don’t blame you, because those geography books aren’t around anymore. Not only the books, the villages aren’t around … Nahal arose in the place of Mahlul; Kibbutz Gvat in the place of Jibat; Kibbutz Sarid in the place of Huneifis; and Kfar Yehushu’a in the place of Tal al Shuman. There is not one single place that did not have a former Arab population.” Hasbara sources such as CAMERA make a big fuss over every one of such quotes and yet, when they do offer a different version, it’s often just as damning. At most, the Zionists had only bought (or otherwise acquired) 7% of the land of Palestine by 1947.
Comment by William Smart — July 31, 2012 @ 10:15 am
Right William. History also gives few answers against of this diaspora myth. If they say that jews were expelled from palestine AD70 or AD135, something is odd in here then. Because between AD351–352, jews managed to do another revolt in palestine. So obviously they travelled to palestine just a revolt in their mind. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_revolt_against_Gallus ).
Again, jewish people travelled from abroad to palestine, to make up yet another revolt later. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samaritan_Revolts )
And again same story ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_revolt_against_Heraclius )
Something just doesn’t match up in this story about “diaspora”.
Comment by mig — August 1, 2012 @ 6:44 am
What took place in the diaspora pre May 15th 1948 is of historical interest, but irrelevant from the moment Israel was declared and accepted into the International Community of Nations as an independent state. The issue is now between a UN Member State and the remaining non-self-governing territory after Israel was declared and recognized as being independent of Palestine.
Comment by talknic — August 1, 2012 @ 2:11 pm
To begin, where the Palestinians came from is completely irrelevant to the Internationally recognized legal status of Israel’s sovereign extent. Territory outside of that sovereign extent is quite simply, not Israeli.
the-engagement.org/ calls for a state as was described in the LoN Mandate for Palestine. One party still demanded their own Jewish state. The Mandate for Palestine didn’t stop the violence.
The International Community through the UN then conceded and proposed partition. The Zionist organization thru the Jewish People’s Council accepted that plan, but there were already Jewish forces outside of the territory they accepted, they’re still outside of the State of Israel. No one has taken anything of Israel’s. No thing. Nothing. Nada. Nil. Israel has taken what is not rightfully Israeli. Israeli statehood did not stop the violence.
the-engagement.org/ presumes this new country will be called Israel, when historically it was called Palestine for a far longer period than any Kingdom of David or State of Israel (which is only a part of Palestine). It omits 64 years of illegal activities perpetuated by Israel, attempts to blame the Palestinians and ignores the cleansing of non-Jews by the Zionist colonial enterprise. It presumes that the dispossession of the Palestinians will cease.
Israel was declared May 15th 1948. The Jewish People’s Council drew a line in the sand and has since illegally acquired (by war) territory “outside the State of Israel”.
The answer to the conflict is to allow the law its full effect by stopping the ridiculous veto vote by the US in the UNSC.
Comment by talknic — July 31, 2012 @ 6:36 am
Hi Talknic,
I knew you are going to say that which I, of course, agree.
I asked that question since I just love your analytical skills and your ability to find out the truth.
I was wondering whether you can verify the claim that “most Palestinians right now, are descendants of People of Israel who stayed in the country after the destruction of the Second Jewish Temple?”
Comment by Anonymous — July 31, 2012 @ 8:07 am
“most Palestinians right now, are descendants of People of Israel who stayed in the country after the destruction of the Second Jewish Temple”?
The question doesn’t lead to anything that actually helps resolve the situation.
1) What is meant by “People of Israel”? The inhabitants of the land under the rule of the Kingdom of David? Or those who ruled them? and;
2) did those who were under the rule of the Israelites consider themselves to be Israelites? We know the area was conquered many times before the Kingdom of David period. Each time there was a residue of local population, sometimes the majority under rule of a minority conqueror, so;
3) were Jews ever in fact a majority in the region during the Kingdom of David? Or at any time?
4) we’re also told after the destruction of the Second Jewish Temple the majority of Jews dissipated into the diaspora. We know those Jewish folk who didn’t leave were a minority.
Comment by talknic — July 31, 2012 @ 10:44 am
I think Mondoweiss has it about right – it’s a new (irrelevant, illegal and humiliating) hurdle been raised by Israel to block any form of “negotiation”. It plays well to the peanut gallery.
Comment by William Smart — June 20, 2012 @ 7:09 am
“Recognition of Israel as a Jewish State” is another new and pointless demand of Israel, as explained by Mondoweiss here http://mondoweiss.net/2011/09/background-on-israel-as-a-jewish-state-and-the-ongoing-discrimination-against-palestinian-citizens-of-israel.html
Until 2001, Palestinians had only been required to agree to Israel’s existence as a state, as they’d done in 1993, for which they were supposed to get the end of occupation.
This new demand “recognizing Israel as a Jewish state” wasn’t even from Israel, it was US officials of the new Bush-43 administration who started talking about it being necessary.
It’s a piece of word-trickery, since it means acquiescing in a permanent second-class status for Palestinian Israelis. It means renouncing at the outset of negotiations the internationally recognized right of Palestinian refugees to return to the land and homes that they were expelled from during Israel’s creation. This new demand was one of the hurdles raised to stop Palestine being granted membership of the UN in 2011.
Comment by William Smart — June 19, 2012 @ 11:53 am
William…
It might have first been voiced by the Bush Admin.. who pushed them to say it? Secretary of State Colin L. Powell delivered a speech on the Middle East in which he briefly called on Palestinians to recognize Israel as a “Jewish state.” Powell doesn’t recall how the phrase ended up in his speech, but David Ivry, then the Israeli ambassador to the United States, says he persuaded an aide to Powell to slip it in.
A few points on the Mondweiss article
“it means acquiescing in a permanent second-class status for Palestinian Israelis”
Palestinian Israelis are not citizens of Palestine. They’re Governed by Israeli law, not by an agreement between Israel and the PA, PLO or a newly Independent State of Palestine.
“It means renouncing at the outset of negotiations the internationally recognized right of Palestinian refugees to return to the land and homes that they were expelled from during Israel’s creation”
Again, no. Their rights stand aside from the existence of the PA, PLO or a newly Independent State of Palestine or any agreement between them and Israel, because RoR is an individual right. Only the individuals concerned have the right to decide to return or accept compensation.
If they decide to return, they’d then become citizens of Israel. They’d no longer be civilians in or governed by Palestine with whom Israel has the agreement.
Comment by talknic — June 20, 2012 @ 3:13 am