Conditions: Honesty, no propaganda, no WikI/Pedia, stay on topic
fnlevit says: October 23, 2013 at 6:40 pm“My latest posts are viciously blocked one after another – posts with links, honest research and references.”
Conditions: Honesty, no propaganda, no WikI/Pedia, stay on topic
fnlevit says: October 23, 2013 at 6:40 pm“My latest posts are viciously blocked one after another – posts with links, honest research and references.”
If you examine the Israeli narrative on the issue of Arabs/Palestine, it never seems to add up.
By 1950 the population of Israel was estimated to be about 1,370,000
There were approximately 156,000 non-Jewish Israeli citizens who were not dispossessed from within the borders of the territory proclaimed by the Israeli Government and recognized as the State of Israel on the 15th May 1948 effective at 00:01 (ME time) and; there were an additional 500,000 Arab Jewish refugees from the Arab states. Many of whom were cared for by UNRWA until 1952/3 when the Israeli Government took over that responsibility.
That’s approximately 656,000 Arabs of a population of about 1,370,000. Which is about 47%.
This figure does not yet include the non-Jewish Israeli Arabs who were dispossessed by 1950 and it does not yet include the indigenous Arab Jews of Palestine.
By simple maths we can see the Arab population of Israel in 1948 was well in excess of 50%. A large number of Israeli Jews today are of Arabic descent. Arab DNA is deeply and inescapably embedded in the Israeli population
20% Arab? The closer you look the more bullsh*t you find
Kerry and the Question of Palestine.
UNSC res 252 has EIGHT reminders…. Does Kerry really think they care?
The three no’s of the khartoum conference. “no peace with Israel, no recognition of Israel and no negotiations with Israel”
Right, wrong? Just, unjust? Reasonable? Biased? Antisemitic? Most importantly, what were the conditions that prompted the Arab states to adopt this stance?
2. The conference has agreed on the need to consolidate all efforts to eliminate the effects of the aggression on the basis that the occupied lands are Arab lands and that the burden of regaining these lands falls on all the Arab States.
3. The Arab Heads of State have agreed to unite their political efforts at the international and diplomatic level to eliminate the effects of the aggression and to ensure the withdrawal of the aggressive Israeli forces from the Arab lands which have been occupied since the aggression of June 5. This will be done within the framework of the main principles by which the Arab States abide, namely, no peace with Israel, no recognition of Israel, no negotiations with it, and insistence on the rights of the Palestinian people in their own country.
This is simply a reflection of UNSC res 476 1. Reaffirms the overriding necessity to end the prolonged occupation of Arab territories occupied by Israel since 1967, including Jerusalem;
No peace with Israel: While territory sovereign to Egypt was under Israeli occupation the two states were technically at war. In the eventual Egypt Israel Peace Treaty Israel was first required and agreed to begin withdrawal before peaceful relations were assumed.
No recognition of Israel: There is no legal basis for demanding recognition.
B) ” ..in the view of the United States, International Law does not require a state to recognize another state; it is a matter for the judgment of each state whether an entity merits recognition as a state. In reaching this judgment, the United States has traditionally looked of the establishment of certain facts. The United States has also taken into account whether the entity in question has attracted the recognition of the International community of states.” There are numerous UN Member states who do not recognize other UN Member States.
All states are never the less required to show “respect for and acknowledgement of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force”. This is reflected in UNSC res 242.
No negotiations: Israel is in breach of numerous UNSC resolutions, International Law, the UN Charter, relative conventions. There is no legal requirement for negotiations. For example the words ‘negotiate’, ‘negotiations’ do not appear in UNSC res242 on which the Egypt Israel Peace Treaty is based. Israel was and still is required to adhere to the law, negotiations or not. Egypt and Jordan were correct in refusing negotiations while Israel was in breach of its legal obligations in respect to their sovereign territory.
The signing of a negotiated peace treaty between Egypt and Israel was by default an act of recognition and; after Israeli withdrawal peaceful relations were assumed. Likewise with Jordan. Both are examples of what UNSC res 242 was formulated to achieve. The end of hostilities between UN Member States.
However, while Israel occupies non-Israeli territories in Palestine, the Golan Heights, Shebaa Farms, the Alghajar village UNSC res 425 and UNSC res 426, Israel is technically at war and those states have a right to “restore” sovereignty over their territories. Professor Stephen M. Schwebel / Elihu Lauterpacht
The Palestinians meanwhile are under no legal obligation to sign a peace agreement with an Occupying Power, to recognize an Occupying Power or to negotiate with an Occupying Power. Negotiations mean only one thing, the Palestinians forgoing some of their legal rights so that Israel may keep non-Israeli territory illegally acquired by war, illegally annexed and illegally settled by Israel since 00:01 May 15th 1948 (ME time)
Propagandists trying to justify Israel’s illegal acquisition of non-Israeli territory are so stupid they beggar belief
Their narrative goes something like this: “Jerusalem is not mentioned in the Quran”
So what? It is entirely irrelevant to the Internationally recognized sovereign extent of the State of Israel and Israel’s responsibilities & illegal activities as the Occupying Power over non-Israeli territories.
Never the less …
I’ve been shown to be incorrect. Edited accordingly
The wholly holey olde Hasbara, is really weird
The Israeli narrative goes something like this: “The international court only gave an advisory opinion, not a binding legal decision” Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (Request for advisory opinion)
Quite true and the court’s advisory opinion was that had they been asked to make a legal decision, binding law would not fall in Israel’s favour!
Only an idiot would proudly hold up the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice pointing to the illegality of Israel’s actions… while claiming it as some kind of evidence in one’s favour…
A state which according to the UNSC is in breach of laws, the UN Charter and relative conventions adopted at the end of WWII in large part because of the treatment of Jewish folk under the Nazis is in respect to those laws behaving no better than the Nazis. That some folk seem to be as oblivious as the German population of their state’s crimes, should be ringing alarm bells.
Dedicated to those Israeli propagandistas who, when asked to provide evidence of their claims, simply can’t … or when they try, they show just the opposite
|Take the Mandate for Palestine.
The propagandist narrative goes like this. “Under the British Mandate Jews have a right to settle anywhere in Palestine” … ” the British Mandate still applies”
However the Mandate for Palestine (the correct title), doesn’t say there should be a Jewish ‘state’. Article 7 Jewish immigrants could get “Palestinian” citizenship.
Furthermore, the Israeli Government web page on the Declaration of the Establishment of the State of Israel, tells us the Mandate “expired” on the night of May 14th 1948 (ME time)
On the May 15th 1948 the Israeli Government’s request for recognition stated:
A declaration of Independent Statehood as envisaged by UNGA res 181 which is enshrined in the Jewish People’s Council Declaration, could not have come into effect if any of that state’s territories were under the authority of another power. One must be ‘independent’ to declare independence. The British administration of Palestine had to end.
However, by 00:01 May 15th 1948 and before 1 October 1948 Jewish forces were already occupying territory in what remained of Palestine, none of which has ever been legally annexed to Israel. Including Jerusalem.
64 years on Israel is still preventing an Independent Palestinian State
There’s something odd about the alleged rocket attack during Obama’s visit to Israel
There’s the obvious:
A nine minute commentary on steroids
Pres Obama was 40 miles away
The insanely stupid speculation on the Palestinian intention in respect to Obama’s visit (reporters’ speculations are not news).
Plus the additional footage of explosions, that had nothing to do with the incident.
Then there’s the obvious:
The explosion was enough to almost entirely disintegrate a steel rocket casing, yet the chair is completely unscathed. The damage to the wall is quite minor and;
the steel shutter shows no signs of damage and;
there’s no mention of Iron Dome
… wasn’t it turned on?
Tue 5th Jan 2015 – Now the video has been removed …
The cease fire had already been broken BTW. Within days of signing it, Israel was killing Palestinian civilians and militants on the Gaza side of the Armistice Demarcation Line
Antisemitism was coined by one Wilhelm Marr. It is specific to the hatred of Jews.
(“Anti-semitism” is technically incorrect)
Gerald Scarfe – Netanyahu depiction 27 Jan 2013 Sunday Times
|The day UK Sunday Times published the cartoon on the left happened to be the day set aside by the United Nations A/RES/60/7, 1 November 2005 as an annual International Day of Commemoration in memory of all victims of the Holocaust.
The cartoon contains no Jewish symbols. It depicts Netanyahu building a wall. Israel IS building a wall outside the Internationally recognized extent of Israeli sovereignty. The cartoon depicts mortar tainted with blood. Thousands of Palestinian civilians HAVE been killed by Israel in its illegal acquisition of non-Israeli territory.
Board of Deputies of British Jews appalled by Sunday Times Cartoon
However, neither the the Sunday Times or Mr Scarf actually made “any comparison”. It’s just another nonsense statement common to the defense of Israel’s illegal policies, where the Board of Deputies of British Jews themselves attempted to make the comparison!
However, if we do compare it with the Assad depiction and Mr Scarfe’s other work we can see both cartoons are in keeping with the criticism Mr Scarfe expresses of other world leaders.
The Board of Deputies of British Jews have produced their own “trope” by A) leveling an accusation of Antisemitism against well deserved criticism of Israeli policies and; B) attempting a comparison accusation.
Statement from Gerald Scarfe – January 29, 2013
First of all I am not, and never have been, anti-Semitic. The Sunday Times has given me the freedom of speech over the last 46 years to criticise world leaders for what I see as their wrong-doings. This drawing was a criticism of Netanyahu, and not of the Jewish people: there was no slight whatsoever intended against them. I was, however, stupidly completely unaware that it would be printed on Holocaust Day, and I apologise for the very unfortunate timing.
Mr Scarfe ought not be apologizing, Israel didn’t bother to stop it’s illegal activities for Holocaust Day, despite the fact that the UN Charter, International Law and Conventions on human rights were in large part adopted because of what befell the Jewish people under the Nazis! Israel has been engaged in military activities “outside the State of Israel” for the last 64 years.
Gerald Scarfe – Assad depiction
I wonder if this is OK?
Israel’s “War of Independence” with the Arab States, like all Hasbara, fails the test of logic.
The Jewish State was offered a defined territory under UNGA res 181.
From the adoption of UNGA res 181 in Nov 1947, a state of civil war existed in Palestine.
Friday, 5 March 1948, the UNGA res 181 offer was accepted “as binding” by the Jewish Agency in a statement to the UNSC
At midnight May 14th 1948 (ME time), the LoN Mandate for Palestine expired.
On May 15th the Provisional Israeli Government proclaimed that at 00:01 the 15th May 1948 (ME time), Israel had effectively become an “independent republic within frontiers approved by the General Assembly of the United Nations in its Resolution of November 29, 1947″. The War of Independence ended the moment Israel became independent.
As of 00:01 May 15th 1948 (ME time), with Jewish/Israeli forces outside the frontiers approved by the General Assembly of the United Nations in its Resolution of November 29, 1947, the civil war became a war waged by the Independent State of Israel on what remained of Palestine. As such, the Arab Regional Powers had a right and duty, on notifying the UNSC (UN Charter Art 51), to attempt to expel foreign forces from Palestine.
The war was fought in territories “outside the State of Israel”. UNSC resolutions on the period call for “peace in Palestine”. None call for ‘peace in Israel’ and no UNSC resolutions condemn the Arab powers for invading Israel.
In 64 years, Israel has never withdrawn from or legally annexed any of the territory allotted for the Arab State.
Digitized – Palestine 1924 -1948 Official Government of Palestine Gazette
Primary Source Reference For WikIPedia Editors:
How many times have you heard “Was there ever a state called Palestine?”? Or “there were never a Palestinian people”?
Think about it. Prior to Israel being declared a state, there was never a State of Israel either. There was once a kingdom. However, for a far longer period of Jewish history in the region, from the Roman era until May 15th 1948, Jews lived there as Palestinians.
Like the holey olde Hasbara mantra “we made the deserts bloom” and what has been carefully cherry picked from Mark Twain, whether there was or was not a Palestinian State or people, is completely irrelevant to the legal extent of Israel’s Internationally recognized sovereignty and Israel’s obligations under the UN Charter, Chapt XI.
Like all the Hasbara attempts to justify the usurping of the Palestinians from their rightful territory, these mantras are simply bullsh*te
|64 years of refusing to see the elephant in the room, has led to some peculiar behaviour.
Instead of seeking a peaceful solution to the I/P conflict, Israel has taken more and more Palestinian territory and ignored more and more UNSC Resolutions. Never making any concessions involving its own territory, while falsely claiming generosity.
Offering the Palestinians parts of their own territory in order that Israel be able to keep Palestinian territory, is a completely bizarre concept of ‘concession/s’. Even more bizarre, that the Israeli Government encourages more and more illegal Jewish Israeli development in “territories occupied”, ignoring the GC’s and placing Israeli citizens in harms way, then claiming security as the reason for a brutal occupation under which Palestinians have lived their entire lives.
The bullsh*te spouted on behalf of Israel at official levels is incredible. Take ‘defensible borders’. I defy anyone to find the words ‘defensible borders’ in any International Law, any UNSC resolution or any Convention. The words simply do not exist. They do not exist for a very simple reason. No state has more right to defensible borders than its neighbours.
After being given the territory for a Jewish homeland state. Israel had no right to then illegally acquire by war and attempt to illegally annex or settle any of the territory set aside for an Arab State. It wasn’t a part of the deal the Jewish People’s Council agreed to in the Declaration of the Establishment of the State of Israel.
Putting lipstick on the pig is not the answer. End the occupation. Get out of Palestine. There’s room enough in Israel for every Jewish person on the planet today.
|No one has anything of Israel’s. If you take other folks territory, they’re not going to like it or you and they’re very likely to fight back. Even with the rocks that were once their homes.
Israel claims it has made generous concessions, but the only concessions that have been made are by the Palestinians. Forgoing their rightful territories under the Laws and UN Charter Israel agreed to uphold.
In an incredibly generous gesture towards peace, the PA has already conceded territory acquired by war by Israel in 1948/49. None of which has ever been legally annexed to Israel.
The ramifications of Israel’s lipstick policies for the last 62 years will be felt for decades, even with a peace agreement or Palestinian Statehood within the 1967 ‘borders’
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
The Leader of the Jewish State made a speech at the UN General Assembly 24th September 2009 stating: “Never has a country gone to such extraordinary lengths to remove the enemy’s civilian population from harm’s way.”
Despite issuing warnings, the State of Israel had all means of escaping the violence of war closed, under the 2005 agreement with Egypt, thereby preventing civilians from fleeing a war zone.
If the State of Israel doesn’t adhere to even the most basic tenets of Judaism, why call it the Jewish State?
Geneva Convention 1V Section II Occupied territories Art49 The Occupying Power shall not detain protected persons in an area particularly exposed to the dangers of war unless the security of the population or imperative military reasons so demand.
Not even the mercy of fleeing by boat after being driven into the sea. Israel controls all Palestinian territorial waters off Gaza’s coast.
If the Jewish State doesn’t adhere to the Customary Laws of War, why is it in the UN?
Think about the warnings, if you dare. We’re expected to believe only civilians are going to read the leaflets or listen to the warnings? Does that really make sense? Like all Hasbara, it simply does not add up.
“Hey Mahmoud, what do you think you’re doing? You can’t read that, it’s for civilians only ………….. pssst….. what does it say?”
“It says civilians only should flee the war zone to… to… uh… to… oh, some other part of the war zone, because one of the most modern equipped militaries in the world with their tanks, artillery, fighter bombers, missiles, fletchettes, cluster bombs, white phosphorus, infantry and billions of loverly dollars of US military aid, is coming to get us”
“Uh huh. Nice of them to give everyone warning”
“But they’re only warning civilians”
“Too late now, we’ve read th’ leaflet”
“We could pretend we haven’t
Well, doesn’t that sort of screw their plan?”
“Not if you’re an Israeli propagandist pretending to be concerned about civilian casualties.”
“Ah. I see….So…..how much time have we got?”
“A few hours”
“OK…. hand me another one of them rickety olde home made rockets. Maybe we can hit something other than sand before we get outta here!”
“Right…. Uh… when you say … “get outta here” … er … th’ crossings are all closed, there’s only here to go unless we swim out to sea “
“They control that too! Not even being driven into th’ sea for these lil’ semites.”
How many times have you heard the expression “the Land of Israel” referring to Israel today?
They’re weasel words, without any meaning in the eyes of the Laws and UN Charter Israel obliged itself to uphold.
Israel was “… proclaimed as an independent republic within frontiers approved by the General Assembly of the United Nations in its Resolution of November 29, 1947″ … to … ” become effective at one minute after six o’clock on the evening of 14 May 1948, Washington time” It was recognized as such by the USA within minutes.
Put quite simply, the “Land of Israel” is territory sovereign to the State of Israel. The acquisition of territory by war is illegal and; as Israel has never legally annexed any territory, the “Land of Israel” is the same as it was when Israel was recognized as the Jewish people’s homeland state in 1948. I.e., before being admitted to the UN and before Israel officially claimed on the 31st Aug 1949, territory it had previously stated was “outside the State of Israel”. A claim that was rebuffed.
How many times have you read accusations like “Under Jordan’s illegal occupation Jews were prevented access to holy places for 19 years”
Let’s first dispense with the silly “Jordan’s illegal occupation” theory. Under the Israel Jordan Armistice Agreement of 1949, Israel AGREED to Jordan being the Occupying Power over the territories subsequently renamed the West Bank. Jordan agreed to Israel being the Occupying Power over territories under Israeli military control.
1. It is agreed that the forces of the Hashemite Jordan Kingdom shall replace the forces of Iraq in the sector now held by the latter forces, the intention of the Government of Iraq in this regard having been communicated to the Acting Mediator in the message of 20 March from the Foreign Minister of Iraq authorizing the delegation of the Hashemite Jordan Kingdom to negotiate for the Iraqi forces and stating that those forces would be withdrawn.
2. It is also recognized that no provision of this Agreement shall in any way prejudice the rights, claims and positions of either Party hereto in the ultimate peaceful settlement of the Palestine question, the provisions of this Agreement being dictated exclusively by military considerations.
Exactly how was it illegal?
The claim it was Jordan prevented Jews access to holy places for 19 years is also a fallacy. They prevented Israeli Jews and Israeli Arabs! In fact, under the Armistice Agreement it was prohibited for citizens of either opposing state to cross the Armistice Demarcation lines.
3. Rules and regulations of the armed forces of the Parties, which prohibit civilians from crossing the fighting lines or entering the area between the lines, shall remain in effect after the signing of this Agreement with application to the Armistice Demarcation Lines defined in articles V and VI.
It is NORMAL for states to restrict the movements of citizens of respective hostile countries and even their own citizens originally from hostile states, curtailing and/or prohibiting their ability to conduct business, buy land etc. Japanese, Germans, Italians, were interned and/or deported by the UK, USA, Australia, during WWII and their assets were frozen. Unless they have opted to take up citizenship in a country other than that of return, thereby losing their refugee status, it is also normal to release and/or allow their return and to unfreeze their assets .
The Israel’s 1948 Emergency Regulations (Foreign Travel) Ordinance still current, prevents Israeli citizens or residents from entering the territory of any entity deemed to be hostile under Israeli law. The Jordanian controlled West Bank was such a hostile entity from 1948 til 1967. So too was Gaza, under Egyptian control.
From 1948 til 1967, Israeli Emergency Regulations prevented citizens and residents, Jews, Christians and Muslims, from worshiping in territories under the military control of Jordan. Naturally Jordan and Egypt did likewise. It is normal behaviour for hostile states.
So what is the point of this Hasbara morsel? How exactly does it effect the legal status of Israel’s Sovereign extent on which UNSC resolutions are based?
Fact is, it doesn’t. It’s just propaganda. Like the claims made about Mark Twain, it is of perhaps historical interest. It has no legal bearing what so ever.
How many times have you heard the phrase “Land For Peace”?
Or perhaps “UNSC Resolution 242 said borders must be negotiated”?
The Israel / Egypt Peace Treaty tells us three major points that contradict Israel’s stupid propaganda.
A) The purpose of UNSC Res 242 was to end hostilities between already existing UN Member states, resulting in peace agreements between those states.
B) Withdrawal by Israel from Egyptian territories was to begin BEFORE peaceful relations were assumed
C) No borders were negotiated. Egypt’s borders were set when it became an independent state, BEFORE Israel was declared.
From the Peace Treaty:
1. In order to provide maximum security for both Parties after the final withdrawal, the lines and the Zones delineated on Map 1 are to be established and organized as follows:
…until Israeli armed forces complete withdrawal from the current J and M Lines established by the Egyptian-Israeli Agreement of September 1975, hereinafter referred to as the 1975 Agreement, up to the interim withdrawal line, all military arrangements existing under that Agreement will remain in effect, except those military arrangements otherwise provided for in this Appendix.
Within a period of seven days after Israeli armed forces have evacuated any area located in Zone A…..
Within a period of seven days after Israeli armed forces have evacuated any area located in Zones A or B…
The Parties agree to remove all discriminatory barriers to normal economic relations and to terminate economic boycotts of each other upon completion of the interim withdrawal.
As soon as possible, and not later than six months after the completion of the interim withdrawal, the Parties will enter negotiations with a view to concluding an agreement on trade and commerce for the purpose of promoting beneficial economic relations.
1. The Parties agree to establish normal cultural relations following completion of the interim withdrawal.
2. They agree on the desirability of cultural exchanges in all fields, and shall, as soon as possible and not later than six months after completion of the interim withdrawal, enter into negotiations with a view to concluding a cultural agreement for this purpose.
Upon completion of the interim withdrawal, each Party will permit the free movement of the nationals and vehicles of the other into and within its territory ….etc etc
Again, from the Israeli Government:
Dear Mr. President,
I am pleased to be able to confirm that the Government of Israel is agreeable to the procedure set out in your letter of March 26, 1979, in which you state:
“I have received a letter from President Sadat that, within one month after Israel completes its withdrawal to the interim line in Sinai, as provided for in the Treaty of peace between Egypt and Israel, Egypt will send a resident ambassador to Israel and will receive in Egypt a resident Israeli ambassador.”
From the Peace Treaty:
Convinced of the urgent necessity of the establishment of a just, comprehensive and lasting peace in the Middle East in accordance with Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338;
Israel was left as the Occupying Power over Palestinian territories captured during the ‘recent conflict’ (1967) and; territories occupied by Israel in 1948/49, not recognized as Israeli by any country and never legally annexed to Israel.