First, find out what isn't true…

September 8, 2016

Does Geneva Convention IV apply to the West Bank? The UNSC says it does!


http://wp.me/pDB7k-1fU
According to the Israeli narrative “Jordan illegally occupied Judea and Samaria” after the 1948 war.
Fact is, on the 3rd of April 1949 Israel signed an Armistice Agreement with the Hashemite Jordan Kingdom leaving Jordan legally in military control of what was official renamed the West Bank.

The Israeli narrative also tells us “Jordan’s annexation of the West Bank was illegal”.
The West Bank was legally annexed to Jordan by request of representatives of the majority of the legitimate inhabitants of the West Bank, in keeping with International Law concerning self determination

Unlike the unilateral annexation by Israel of East Jerusalem, which was condemned by the UNSC, there was no UNSC condemnation of the bilateral annexation of the West Bank by Jordan

The other Arab states demanded Jordan annex the West Bank as a trustee only (Session: 12-II Date: May 1950) in keeping with the UN Charter Chapter XI

By 1967 Jordan, including the West Bank, was a UN Member State and had ratified Geneva Convention IV. In other words, it was a High Contracting Power

UNSC res 228 tells us the West Bank was “the territory of Jordan

UNSC res 476 tells us Geneva Convention IV is applicable http://wp.me/pDB7k-W8

By the UNSC resolutions, reaffirming and emphasizing binding Law/UN Charter/etc, the Israeli narrative is simply bullsh*t!

Further reading re-recognition of the annexation of the West Bank by Jordan thanks to D G Fincham:

http://digicoll.library.wisc.edu/cgi-bin/FRUS/FRUS-idx?type=turn&entity=FRUS.FRUS1948v05p2.p1138&id=FRUS.FRUS1948v05p2&isize=M

http://digicoll.library.wisc.edu/cgi-bin/FRUS/FRUS-idx?type=turn&entity=FRUS.FRUS1950v05.p0943&id=FRUS.FRUS1950v05&isize=M

Advertisements

October 1, 2015

One step for Palestine a giant leap for mankind


ShortLink http://wp.me/pDB7k-1e8
One step for Palestine a giant leap for mankind

The raising of the flag of the STATE OF PALESTINE!

http://webtv.un.org/watch/raising-of-the-palestinian-flag-at-the-united-nations/4521239871001

UN speech by Mahmoud Abbas

http://webtv.un.org/watch/palestine-general-debate-70th-session/4521133284001

December 15, 2014

More theft by Israel. Not showing Jewish values!


ShortLink http://wp.me/pDB7k-1cY

Palestinian maritime borders From Haaretz – By Eran Azran and Reuters 22:09 14.12.14

A new natural gas field off Israel’s Mediterranean coast may hold about 3.2 trillion cubic feet of gas, about one third the size of the giant Tamar field, its two Israeli partners said Sunday after conducting a 3D seismic survey of the area.

If the estimate is accurate, reserves for the Royee prospect, located about 150 kilometers (93 miles) offshore Israel and close to its maritime borders with Cyprus and Egypt, would be the third-largest discovered in Israeli waters and the fourth-largest in the Mediterranean Basin, said Israel Opportunity, a partner in the group.

Problem … Under which official agreement did Israel legally acquire the territories “outside the State of Israel” … “in Palestine”?

Fact is, there is no such agreement and;
the acquisition of territory by war was illegal by 1933 under the Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States, adopted into the UN Charter 1945, International Law when Israel’s boundaries were proclaimed and recognized!

Put simply, Israel’s maritime borders with Egypt are not as claimed

Israel’s Mediterranean coastline extends only as far South as Ashdod and North as far as Acre!

Map of Palestinian territory never legally annexed to Israel

December 5, 2014

More Stupid Hasbara – Arafat was born in Egypt


http://wp.me/pDB7k-1cE

“It’s ironic that the man who personified the Palestinian movement was neither born in the region it claims, nor conforms to his own organization’s definition of Palestinian identity”

So what? Like all Hasbara, where Arafat was born is irrelevant to the actual sovereign extent of Israel’s self proclaimed, Internationally recognized boundaries and Israel’s illegal activities as the Occupying Power over non-Israeli territories over the last 66 years. That’s right 66 years! Not since 1967 as often claimed!

Applying the same stupid criteria to Israel, we find that only one of the signatories to Israel’s Declaration of statehood was born in the region

David Ben-Gurion – Płońsk, Poland – Palestine 1906
Rabbi Kalman Kahana – Galicia (Ukraine) – Palestine 1938
Aharon Zisling – Minsk, Belarus – Palestine 1904
Yitzhak Ben-Zvi – Poltava (Ukraine) – Palestine 1907
Saadia Kobashi – Yemen – Palestine 1909
Daniel Auster – Knihinin (Ukraine) – Palestine 1914
Rachel Cohen – Odesa – Palestine 1919
David-Zvi Pinkas – Sopron, Austria/Hungary – Palestine 1925
Mordechai Bentov = Grodzisk Mazowiecki, Poland – Palestine 1920
Moshe Kol – Pinsk, Belarus – Palestine 1932
Eliyahu Berlignee – Russia – Palestine 1907
Rabbi Yitzchak Meir Levin – Góra Kalwaria, Russia – Palestine 1940
Eliezer Kaplan – Minsk, Russia – Palestine 1920
Peretz Bernstein – Meiningen, Germany – Netherlands til Palestine 1936
Abraham Katznelson – Bobruisk, Belorussia – Palestine 1924
Rabbi Wolf Gold – Stettin, Germany (Poland) – US 1907 – Palestine 1935
Meir David Loewenstein – Copenhagen, Denmark – Palestine 1934
Pinchas Rosen – Berlin, Germany – Palestine 1926
Meir Grabovsky – Rîbniţa, Russia – Palestine 1927
David Remez – Kopys, Belorussia – Palestine 1913
Yitzhak Gruenbaum – Warsaw, Poland – Palestine 1933
Zvi Luria (Lurie) – Lodz, Poland – Palestine 1924
Berl Repetur – Ruzhyn, Ukraine – Palestine 1920
Dr. Abraham Granovsky – Făleşti, Russia – Palestine 1924
Golda Myerson – Kiev, Ukraine – Palestine 1921
Mordekhai Shattner – Chernovitz ? ( Czernowitz ?), Ukraine ? – Palestine unsure (England during WWW2)
Nachum Nir – Warsaw, Poland – Palestine 1925
Ben-Zion Sternberg – Czernowitz, Austria /Hungary – Palestine 1939
Eliyahu Dobkin – Babruysk, Russia – Palestine 1932
Zvi Segal – Lithuania – Palestine unsure
Bechor-Shalom Sheetrit – Tiberias, Ottoman Empire
Meir Wilner-Kovner – Vilnius, Lithuania – Palestine 1938
Rabbi Yehuda Leib Hacohen Fishman – Mărculești, Russia – Palestine 1913
Haim-Moshe Shapira – Grodno, Belarus – Palestine 1925
Zerach Warhaftig – Volkovysk, Russia – Lithuania/Japan/Canada 1941 – Palestine 1947

BTW Very few were possibly subject to the Holocaust

July 13, 2014

Israeli propaganda FAIL! Photo fakes July 2014


ShortLink http://wp.me/pDB7k-1c2
Who does Israel think it’s fooling with fake photos?
1) The water pipes either side are completely un-damaged. It simply DOES NOT look like a rocket of that diameter has buried the majority of its length in the earth!
It’s OBVIOUSLY fake!
fake Hamas rocket - Hasbara

2) A rocket might have struck this house at some time, but there’s no signs of charring from a grad explosion WHAT SO EVER!!!
Is it a photo of demolition work?

See how Israel’s Magic Sofa Chairs resist the charring and shrapnel you’d expect to see from a rocket explosion large enough to cause this amount of damage!
fake rocket damage 2 - Hasbara

See how Israel’s Magic Sofa Chairs bury themselves under the rubble
fake rocket damage - Hasbara

The amount of damage it seems, was caused by the explosion of two gas cylinders allegedly set off by a grad rocket. Oddly there are no photos of the remnants of the alleged rocket. If it completely disintegrated, one would expect far more damage and a lot of charring.

——-

Compare the kind of destruction wrought on Palestine to that on Israel

gaza destruction 01
gaza destruction 02
islamic university Gaza aug 2104
gaza destruction 05
gaza destruction 06

Destruction in Gaza ———- Destruction in Israel

The Palestinians have no where to flee the war zone, not even the sea. Under the 2005 agreement and the Israeli/Egypt Peace Treaty Israel has had all the crossings closed including those with Egypt. Only an Occupying Power has this right.

In the bigger picture, the Palestinians ask for far less than their LEGAL rights under the Laws and UN Charter which Israel is obliged to follow. Abbas offered in front of the world at the UN to concede 78% of their rightful territory for peace, Meanwhile while Israel offers nothing and makes demands that have absolutely no legal basis what so ever and continues its illegal expansionist policies.

May 30, 2014

Palestinians continue to die in their own country at the hands of the Occupying Power


15th May 1948 Letter From the Agent of the Provisional Government of Israel to the President of the United States, “MY DEAR MR. PRESIDENT: I have the honor to notify you that the state of Israel has been proclaimed as an independent republic within frontiers approved by the General Assembly of the United Nations in its Resolution of November 29, 1947, and that a provisional government has been charged to assume the rights and duties of government for preserving law and order within the boundaries of Israel, for defending the state against external aggression, and for discharging the obligations of Israel to the other nations of the world in accordance with international law. The Act of Independence will become effective at one minute after six o’clock on the evening of 14 May 1948, Washington time.” Israel has never legally acquired any further territory!

ShortLink http://wp.me/pDB7k-1bM

An analysis of some of the information available relating to the deaths of Nadim Nuwara and Mohammad Abu Thaher in Beitunia on May 15th 2014 in the occupied State of Palestine


“He fell forward. A bullet would have knocked him away from the fire, he should have fallen back…” Bullsh*t! A rabbit isn’t even knocked away from the fire of a .22 bullet

The Palestinians ask for their legal rights under the Laws and UN Charter Israel agreed to uphold.

Meanwhile, “Israel, the Occupying Power” makes demands that have no legal basis what so ever. Read UNSC res 476, one of EIGHT reminders to Israel of its legal obligations and giving Israel the OPPORTUNITY to adhere to the law. Unfortunately the Jewish state has failed to live up to the promises it made when it was proclaimed and when it became a UN Member state.

November 14, 2013

Israel agree to two states? Israel’s intentions were voiced to the Conciliation Commission on August 31st 1949. It’s actions since, show no change of plan.


15th May 1948 Letter From the Agent of the Provisional Government of Israel to the President of the United States, “MY DEAR MR. PRESIDENT: I have the honor to notify you that the state of Israel has been proclaimed as an independent republic within frontiers approved by the General Assembly of the United Nations in its Resolution of November 29, 1947, and that a provisional government has been charged to assume the rights and duties of government for preserving law and order within the boundaries of Israel, for defending the state against external aggression, and for discharging the obligations of Israel to the other nations of the world in accordance with international law. The Act of Independence will become effective at one minute after six o’clock on the evening of 14 May 1948, Washington time.”

ShortLink http://wp.me/pDB7k-l5

Despite the fact that the League of Nations Covenant Article 20 tells us Palestine was a state with provisional recognition, referenced in the very first line of the League of Nation Mandate for Palestine and in Article 7, one of Israel’s main assertions has been that Palestine has never been a state.

Another of Israel’s arguments is that because the Arabs refused to recognize UNGA res 181, Israel somehow has some extra special right to territories the Israeli Government itself claimed on May 22nd 1948 were “outside the State of Israel” … “in Palestine”  and under Israeli military control.  I.e., “occupied”

The arguments are not only nonsense, they’re entirely irrelevant.  States cannot simply take what is not their own without the express permission of the legal inhabitants.  Since at least 1933 it has been illegal (inadmissible) to “acquire” territory by war, furthermore it is illegal for other states to recognize territories acquired by war.  A fact confirmed by Schwebel, Lauterpacht & Herzog, who tell us territory may only be “restored” by war.  No Israeli territories have ever been taken.  Israel has never had to ‘restore’ any of its territories, it has been “acquiring” territory by war.

Israel is no different from any other independent state. What lies outside of Israel’s legal sovereign extent, is simply not Israeli.  Since Israel’s territories were proclaimed by the Israeli Government in their plea for recognition, no further territories have ever been legally acquired by Israel by any agreement and no state has ever recognized any territories acquired by war as Israeli.

Israel’s official 31st of August 1949 claim (as a UN Member state) to alleged non-state territories of Palestine shows “respect for and acknowledgement of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area”  except for the Palestinian territories.   Israel’s claim was refused BTW, citing the Armistice Agreements.

The Egypt Israel Peace Treaty ensured Israel withdrew from all territories sovereign to Egypt before peaceful relations were assumed. Again eventually showing respect for the territory belonging to state in the region.

Not so with the West Bank as it is now known, which was legally annexed by Jordan at the request of the Palestinians.  Jordan’s annexation of that territory was as a trustee only (Session: 12-II Date: May 1950). Unlike the UNSC condemnation of Israel’s unilateral annexation of East Jerusalem, there is no UNSC condemnation of the bilateral annexation by Jordan.  At the time of its capture by Israel in 1967, the west Bank was territory sovereign to Jordan, by then UN Member state and High Contracting Power. Which is why  the UNSC considers Geneva Convention IV to apply.

The vast majority of the International Community of Nations have already recognized Palestine as a state in accordance with the Palestinians 1988 declaration of statehood, where Palestine conceded 78% of their rightful territories for peace with Israel.  Israel’s reply was to ignore and create even more illegal facts on the ground.

Despite hundreds of UNSC resolutions affording Israel hundreds of opportunities to adhere to the binding Laws, UN Charter and relevant binding conventions those resolutions reaffirm and emphasize, why does Israel insist  maintaining its stance in respect to the territories “outside the State of Israel” … “in Palestine” ?

Perhaps the answer lies in one line of  A) the Declaration of the Establishment of the State of Israel “The state of Israel ….will be based on freedom, justice and peace as envisaged by the prophets of Israel and one line from; B) Deuteronomy 20:15 which describes how territories not belonging to neighbouring states should be treated.

…1948 …discussing the Declaration…

Ben-Gurion did not want to limit themselves from the outset: We accepted the UN Resolution, but the Arabs did not. They are preparing to make war on us. If we defeat them and capture western Galilee or territory on both sides of the road to Jerusalem, these areas will become part of the state. Why should we obligate ourselves to accept boundaries that in any case the Arabs don’t accept?”

It should be noted that A) the resolution contained the proviso as envisaged in this plan, B) the Jewish Agency’s final acceptance of UNGA res 181 is enshrined in the Declaration of the Establishment of the State of Israel and C) the Israeli Government asked to be and indeed was recognized per the frontiers outlined in the resolution. Furthermore, the resolution contained no clause requiring the Arab States to agree or co-sign, nor could it. It was an offer for “either” party to declare Sovereign Independence over a set of boundaries as envisaged in this plan, if they wished. It was not and could not be demanded or obligatory as it would go against the meaning of ‘independent’. The declaration of one could not be ‘dependent’ on the other. This was confirmed by the Jewish Agency itself prior to declaration Friday, 19 March 1948 Rabbi Silver replacing Mr. Shertok at the Council table as representative of the Jewish Agency for Palestine stated:

“We are under the obligation at this time to repeat what we stated at a [262nd meeting] meeting of the Security Council last week: The decision of the General Assembly remains valid for the Jewish people. We have accepted it and we are prepared to abide by it. If the United Nations Palestine Commission is unable to carry out the mandates which were assigned to it by the General Assembly, the Jewish people of Palestine will move forward in the spirit of that resolution and will do everything which is dictated by considerations of national survival and by considerations of justice and historic rights.” “The setting up of one State was not made conditional upon the setting up of the other State.”

And again Security Council S/PV.271 19 March 1948 The representative of the Jewish Agency, Rabbi Silver:

“The statement that the plan proposed by the General Assembly is an integral plan which cannot succeed unless each of its parts can be carried out, is incorrect. This conception was never part of the plan. Indeed, it is contrary to the statement made by the representative of the United States during the second session of the General Assembly. The setting up of one State was not made conditional upon the setting up of the other State. Mr. Herschel Johnson, representing the United States delegation, speaking in a sub-committee of the Ad Hoc Committee on the Palestinian Question on 28 October 1947, stated, in discussing this very matter in connexion with economic union: “The element of mutuality would not necessarily be a factor, as the document might be signed by one party only.”

UNGA res 181 F. ADMISSION TO MEMBERSHIP IN THE UNITED NATIONS

When the independence of either the Arab or the Jewish State as envisaged in this plan has become effective and the declaration and undertaking, as envisaged in this plan, have been signed by either of them, sympathetic consideration should be given to its application for admission to membership in the United Nations in accordance with article 4 of the Charter of the United Nations. (Article 4 Membership in the United Nations is open to all other peace-loving states which accept the obligations contained in the present Charter and, in the judgment of the Organization, are able and willing to carry out these obligations)

In order to be accepted into the UN through a recommendation by the UNSC, Israel had to declare its independence “as envisaged in” the UN plan enshrined in the Declaration of the Establishment of the State of Israel and; the International Community of Nations granted recognition as asked by the Provisional Government of Israel.

Letter From the Agent of the Provisional Government of Israel… ” I have the honor to notify you that the state of Israel has been proclaimed as an independent republic within frontiers approved by the General Assembly of the United Nations in its Resolution of November 29, 1947, and that a provisional government has been charged to assume the rights and duties of government for preserving law and order within the boundaries of Israel, for defending the state against external aggression, and for discharging the obligations of Israel to the other nations of the world in accordance with international law. The Act of Independence will become effective at one minute after six o’clock on the evening of 14 May 1948, Washington time.”

ShortLink to here In the following letter of the 31st August 1949 to Conciliation Commission Israel reveals : A) It’s intention to possess all the non-state (Palestinian) territories in the region. B) It’s admission, by stating it’s intention, that the non-state territories it had acquired by war by 1949 were not it’s own C) It’s admission, by stating it’s intention, that no part of Syria (the Golan) was Israeli. D) It’s admission, by stating it’s intention, that there would be no form of self determination by the Palestinians, relating only to the surrounding Arab states E) Via the final paragraph, if Israel didn’t get it’s way, it would not respect the recognized Sovereign integrity of the Arab states and their right to live in peace

31 August 1949 Addressed to the Chairman of the Conciliation Commission by Mr. Reuven. Shiloah Head of the Delegation of Israel and containing Replies to the Commission’s Questionnaire of 15 August 1949 I have the honour to acknowledge receipt of the Conciliation Commission’s memorandum of August 15 and to convey to you the answers of the Delegation of Israel to the questions submitted therein, 1. The Delegation of Israel is prepared to sign a declaration along the general lines suggested in Chapter I of the Commission’ s memorandum, subject to precision on the following specific points: (a) The Government of Israel considers that the solution of the refugee problem is to be sought primarily in the resettlement of the refugees in Arab territories, but it is prepared for its part, as already indicated to the Commission, to make it’s own contribution by agreeing to a measure of resettlement in Israel. (b) While the Government of Israel cannot bind itself in advance to the implementation of such solutions as the survey group may propose, it will undertake to facilitate the task of this group and to give full consideration to any proposals the group may put forward 2. The Delegation of Israel wishes to offer certain further comments on Chapter I of the Commission’s memorandum, in order to make its attitude perfectly clear: (a) The Delegation of Israel has taken note of the proviso that it is understood that the repatriated refugees will become ipso facto citizens of Israel and that no discrimination will be practised against them both with regard to the civil and political rights which they will exercise and to the obligation imposed upon them by the law of the land. The Delegation is astonished however,that there is no mention of any similar understanding with regard to the refugees to be resettled elsewhere. (b) The Delegation of Israel desires to stress it’s understanding that any repatriation in Israel as indicated by the Commission, would take place subject to financial assistance furnished by the International community and that such assistance would be extended to include the. resettlement of Jewish refugees from the Arab-controlled areas of Palestine (c The Delegation of Israel has already presented to the Commission a provisional estimate of the number of refugees which the Government of Israel would be ready to accept. It is desired, in this connection, to point out that the Government of Israel’s willingness to facilitate the task of the survey group rests within the framework of the contribution which it has declared itself ready to make to the solution of the refugee problem. (d) The Delegation of Israel desires to take this opportunity of reiterating its earlier statement to the Commission that the Government of Israel can agree to the repatriation of refugees to Israel only as part of an overall settlement of the refugee problem and of the Palestine conflict.

Link this bit 3. With regard to the territorial adjustments of which the Commission treats in Chapter II of it’s memorandum, the Delegation of Israel considers that in addition to the territory indicated on the working document annexed to the Protocol of May 12, all other areas falling within the control and jurisdiction of Israel under the terms of the armistice agreements concluded by Israel with Egypt, the Lebanon, the Hashemite Jordan Kingdom and Syria should be formally recognized as Israeli territory. The adjustment of the frontiers so created will be subject to negotiation and agreement between Israel and the Arab Government in each case concerned. 4, In this connection the Delegation of Israel desires to offer a number of observations: (a) The territorial adjustments proposed above has the following effects: (i) No territory forming part of Egypt, the Lebanon, the Hashemite Jordan Kingdom or Syria is added to Israel by this adjustment (ii) No territory ever awarded to Egypt, the Lebanon, the Hashemite Jordan Kingdom or Syria by any international instrument or held by them under any agreement is added to Israel by this adjustment. (iii) No territory in which Egypt, the Lebanon, the Hashemite Jordan Kingdom or Syria exercises authority or jurisdiction under the armistice agreements concluded pursuant to the Security Councils resolution of November 16, 1948 and endorsed by the Security Council’s resolution of August 11, 1949 is added to Israel by this adjustment. If the territorial adjustment proposed were not effected, territory awarded to Israel under an international instrument or held by it under the terms of an agreement (viz: territory in which Israel exercises authority and jurisdiction under, the armistice agreements concluded pursuant to the Security Council’s resolution of November 16, I948 and endorsed by the Security Council’s resolution of August 11, 1949) would be added to one or more Arab States. The Delegation of Israel holds, therefore, that only the territorial adjustment proposed above falls equally in its effects on the rights and position of each negotiating party, makes no encroachment upon existing sovereignties, and preserves the juridical status and actual, stability achieved by the existing agreements. This method of achieving a territorial settlement is furthermore, in precise accord with the resolution adopted by the General Assembly on December 11, 1948 calling upon the Governments concerned to extend the scope of the negotiations provided for in the Security Council’s resolution of November 16, 1948 and to seek agreement by negotiations conducted either with the Conciliation Commission or directly, with a view to the final settlement of all questions outstanding between them. 5, I venture to point out that paragraph 3 above is to be read in the light of the observations offered in paragraph 4, and to request that in any use which the Commission may make of this statement of the Israeli Delegations position, shall not be cited without the addition of paragraph 3. I am Yours faithfully, Reuven Shiloah

THE REPLY: 3 September 1949 addressed to Mr. Reuven Shiloah, Head of the Delegation of Israel, by the Chairman of the Conciliation Commission, Emphatically dismisses the notion. referring Israel back to the armistice agreements. “2. The Armistice Demarcation Line is not to be construed in any sense as a political or territorial boundary, and is delineated without prejudice to rights, claims and positions of either Party to the Armistice as regards ultimate settlement of the Palestine question” NB: (a) The territorial adjustments proposed above has the following effects: …etc etc The territorial adjustments proposed were not accepted, to the opposite effect. Actions speak louder than words. The ‘effects’ have been Israel has: A) failed to have respect for and acknowledgement of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force.” B) illegally acquiring by war, Sovereign Syrian territory (Golan ’67). (Israel was requires, agreed and withdrew from Egyptian territory BEFORE peaceful relations were assumed) C) illegally claimed non-state territories belonging to the Palestinians, prior to the question of Palestine being resolved. D) illegally annexed “territories occupied” E) illegally instituted Israeli Civil Law in “territories occupied” F) illegally built Israeli civilian infrastructure and dwellings for illegal settlers in illegally acquired and illegally annexed “territories occupied” G) illegally sold illegally acquired and illegally annexed “territories occupied” to illegal settlers H) has yet to write a constitution i) shown that it cannot be trusted J) As a separate state, taken away the Jewish right to live in all of Palestine, limiting Israeli Jews to only Israeli Sovereign territory unless, they become ILLEGAL settlers or citizens o Palestine or Syria (in the Golan). Furthermore, under the 1948 Israeli military ordinance, still current, it is forbidden for Israeli citizens or residents to travel from Israel into the territories of a hostile entity. Contrary to the Hasbara, the Israeli emergency Law of 1948 prevented Israeli Jews and Israeli Muslims, Israeli Christians et al, from worshiping in Jerusalem from 1948 – 1967.

It is of course quite common for countries at war to either expel or inter foreign nationals and/or possible 5th columnists and to freeze their assets.  It’s also common to repatriate then and release their assets at the close of hostilities.

September 27, 2013

Netanyahu CONvincing the world at the UN 2013


netanyahu UN 2013 settlers guns

netanyahu Hasbarrow 02

netanyahu UN 2013 01

netanyahu UN 2013 02

netanyahu UN 2013 03

Shortlink http://wp.me/pDB7k-1a8

May 24, 2013

Kerry and the Question of Palestine. In perspective


ShortLink http://wp.me/pDB7k-19a

Kerry and the Question of Palestine.

In perspective

kerry is just another us politician

kerry is just another us politician

UNSC res 252 has EIGHT reminders…. Does Kerry really think they care?

May 10, 2013

The three No’s of Khartoum – no peace with Israel, no recognition of Israel and no negotiations with Israel


ShortLink http://wp.me/pDB7k-18N

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.

A) States plead for 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)

March 28, 2013

Jerusalem is not mentioned in the Quran? It’s irrelevant to the International Law


ShortLink http://wp.me/pDB7k-18m

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 …

The Quran is written in Arabic. Jerusalem translated to Arabic is القدس. The word “القدس” appears in 4 verses in Quran

I’ve been shown to be incorrect. Edited accordingly

March 27, 2013

The wholly holey olde Hasbara – Palestine vs Israel the I/P conflict – Israeli propaganda is really weird


ShortLink http://wp.me/pDB7k-18d

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…

It’s

really

twisted.

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.

It’s

really

twisted.

March 23, 2013

Israeli propagandists and the wholly holey moldy olde Hasbara


ShortLink http://wp.me/pDB7k-187

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

Waiting for the Israeli propagandist 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:

“MY DEAR MR. PRESIDENT: I have the honor to notify you that the state of Israel has been proclaimed as an independent republic within frontiers approved by the General Assembly of the United Nations in its Resolution of November 29, 1947, and that a provisional government has been charged to assume the rights and duties of government for preserving law and order within the boundaries of Israel, for defending the state against external aggression, and for discharging the obligations of Israel to the other nations of the world in accordance with international law. The Act of Independence will become effective at one minute after six o’clock on the evening of 14 May 1948, Washington time.”

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

June 20, 2012

Israel uses secret weapon to solve the Israeli / Palestinian conflict. Israel grants massive concessions in 2012


ShortLink http://wp.me/pDB7k-12c
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’

May 16, 2012

The Hasbara – Israel vs Palestine – Is the UN really biased against Israel?


ShortLink http://wp.me/pDB7k-XU

How many times have you heard “The UN is biased against Israel” ?

Rather odd if you consider the fact that the UNSC has offered Israel hundreds of opportunities to abide by binding Law, the UN Charter and relative conventions reaffirmed and emphasized in those resolutions. It has been Israel who has refused, preferring instead to increase its illegal fact on the ground!

Is the gas company biased for sending you a reminder when you haven’t paid your original bill? Of course it isn’t. It’s what you agreed to for being hooked up to the grid. Israel agreed to uphold International Law and the UN Charter in order to become a UN Member State.

Just one example of this so called “UN bias” is UNSC Resolution 252 which has EIGHT reminders, which only exist because Israel ignored the first. Are these reminders bias?

252 (1968) of 21 May 1968, 267 (1969) of 3 July 1969, 271 (1969) of 15 September 1969, 298 (1971) of 25 September 1971, 446 (1979) of 22 March 1979, 452 (1979) 20 July 1979, 465 (1980) of 1 March 1980, 476 June 30 1980 and 478 August 20 1980 …. Oh, and Israel’s annexation of the Golan was also condemned by the UNSC Res 497

The next step in the holey olde Hasbara is of course “Ah, but these are Chapter VI resolutions. Chapter VI resolutions are not binding”. Correct. However, the Laws (all law is binding), UN Charter (binding on all members in its entirety) and relevant conventions re-affirmed and emphasized in ANY UN/UNSC resolution, are by their very nature binding!

CHAPTER VI: PACIFIC SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES
Article 33
The parties to any dispute, the continuance of which is likely to endanger the maintenance of international peace and security, shall, first of all, seek a solution by negotiation, enquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements, or other peaceful means of their own choice.
The Security Council shall, when it deems necessary, call upon the parties to settle their dispute by such means.

Does “shall” mean: “may”? “might”? “could”? “would”? “do you want to”? “would you like to”?

The Charter isn’t posing a question like; “Shall we dance?”. Nor are the Chapter VI resolutions, which more often than not “reaffirm” and “emphasize” binding laws and conventions. All law, by it’s very nature, is obligatory and;
All UN Member States are obliged to adhere to the Charter in its entirety.

Far from being biased against Israel, the UN/UNSC has given the Jewish state HUNDREDS of opportunities to meet its legal obligations. Far more than any other country on the planet! Israel’s claims of bias are propaganda nonsense.

May 15, 2012

The elephant in the room cannot see itself – Israel vs Palestine – The elephant acknowledges International Law


The elephant in the room cannot see itself. Israel vs Palestine
ShortLink http://wp.me/pDB7k-XM

The elephant acknowledges International Law ?

Haaretz – By Barak Ravid | 00:59 15.05.12 Israeli Foreign Ministry: International law allows deportation of South Sudan asylum seekers
International law poses no barrier to deporting all 700 South Sudanese who live in Israel, but the government should examine the situation of every South Sudanese asylum seeker to ascertain whether their lives would be at risk if they were sent back, the Foreign Ministry announced in an official brief this week.

Should apply to all equally. Let’s try …

Israeli Foreign Ministry: International law allows deportation of Palestine refugees.
International law poses no barrier to deporting all Palestinians who live in Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Egypt, but the government should examine the situation of every Palestine refugee to ascertain whether their lives would be at risk if they were sent back, the Foreign Ministry announced in an official brief this week.

Would it result in 4 million or so refugees changing the demographics within Israel’s legally recognized Sovereign territory? The law and simple maths tells us it is only a threat to a Greater Israel.

The official Palestinian claim to RoR is under UNGA res 194, using this definition, written before UNRWA was formed and before Israel officially claimed territory “outside the State of Israel”.

December 27, 2010

Israel vs Palestine. The fallacy of defensible borders. UNSC Resolution 242 says NOTHING about ‘defensible borders’


…It’s actually quite simple. If it isn’t the “acknowledged” sovereign territory of Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Egypt or Israel,
it’s a territory of Palestine…

ShortLink http://wp.me/pDB7k-Mn

UNSC Resolution 242 says NOTHING about ‘defensible borders’

LOGIC: No matter how much of other folk’s territory an entity acquires for ‘defensible’ borders, it will still be next to the people whose territory it is acquiring.

QUESTION: Why has one entity in any region the right to have more ‘defensible’ borders than any other entity in the region?

Fact is, it hasn’t. UN Charter Article 2
“The Organization and its Members, in pursuit of the Purposes stated in Article 1, shall act in accordance with the following Principles.
The Organization is based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its Members.”

If Palestine is recognized by a 2/3rds majority of UN Member States, game over for Deuteronomy 20:15. Game over for being an Occupying Power over what will legally be recognized as a “Regional Power”. There is no requirement that they be powerful, nor do they have to be a UN Member State.

Of course defensible borders are a military advantage, however, the Jewish People’s Council accepted and declared boundaries “within frontiers approved by the General Assembly of the United Nations in its Resolution of November 29, 1947”, which did not include territories already under the control of Jewish forces at the time of declaration.

They did not include the territories Israel confirmed were not it’s own on May 22 1948

They did not include the territories Israel attempted to claim on 31st August 1949

They did not include the territories Israel has ‘acquired’ by war, or illegal annexation, or illegal settlement, since declaration. None of which has been legally annexed.

QUESTION: If the territory is genuinely acquired for military purposes, aka, defense, why is it being populated with …. ahem….Israeli civilians?

The Laws of War and GC’s are there to protect ALL civilians, especially NOT having the Occupying Power’s civilians in occupied territories for the simple reason that the occupied have a right to armed resistance in which the Occupying Power’s civilians might become collateral statistics The Occupying Power has a duty to it’s civilians to ensure they are NOT in territories acquired by war, in order to safeguard them. Israel in fact endangers it’s citizens by encouraging and assisting them to settle in occupied territories!

QUESTION In order for an entity to defend it’s civilians illegally in illegally ‘acquired’ territories, from those whose territories it has illegally acquired, is it logical for Israel to further incur their wrath by attempting to acquire even more of their territory to protect the territory you have already illegally ‘acquired’?

The answer is of course, no. Consecutive Israeli Governments have been more than irresponsible, they have been incredibly … STUPID!!

December 16, 2010

Israel has no fixed borders? On May 22 1948 Israel confirmed it’s borders in a letter to the UNSC. The Hasbara does not explain, it justifies the usurping of the Palestinians


…It’s actually quite simple. If it isn’t the actual Sovereign Territory of Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Egypt or Israel, then by default it is the territory of what remained of Palestine on May 15th 1948. Non-self Governing Territories fall under the protection of the UN Charter Chapt XI…

ShortLink http://wp.me/pDB7k-KL

How many times have you heard the notion that Israel has no borders with Palestine? According to the Provisional Israeli Government’s May 15th 1948 plea for recognition, the State of Israel was declared

“within frontiers approved by the General Assembly of the United Nations in its Resolution of November 29, 1947,”

Israel was immediately recognized as such by the US followed by Russia and; recognized as such by the majority of the International Community of Nations before being accepted into the UN and; the extent of Israel’s sovereignty was confirmed by the Israeli Government in a statement to the UNSC on 22nd May 1948, before Israel was accepted into the UN as declared and recognized, before the Armistice Agreements and; before Israel made the first claims to territories the Israeli Government stated (n 22nd May ’48) were “outside the territory of the State of Israel”.

On May 15th 1948 the extent of Israel’s Sovereign territories were clearly defined in the Israeli Government’s official plea for recognition to the President of the USA.

May 15, 1948 Letter From the Agent of the Provisional Government of Israel to the President of the United States, “MY DEAR MR. PRESIDENT: I have the honor to notify you that the state of Israel has been proclaimed as an independent republic within frontiers approved by the General Assembly of the United Nations in its Resolution of November 29, 1947, and that a provisional government has been charged to assume the rights and duties of government for preserving law and order within the boundaries of Israel, for defending the state against external aggression, and for discharging the obligations of Israel to the other nations of the world in accordance with international law. The Act of Independence will become effective at one minute after six o’clock on the evening of 14 May 1948, Washington time.”

The US immediately recognized Israel as such. No more, no less. The British also recognized Israel as such and considered non-declared territories under Israel’s control by the time of British recognition, as occupied.

On May 22nd 1948 the extent of Israel’s Sovereign territories were clearly stated again in the Israeli Government’s Reply to the UNSC.

May 22, 1948 The reply of the Provisional Government of Israel UNSC S/766 to the questions addressed to the “Jewish authorities in Palestine” was transmitted by the acting representative of Israel at the United Nations on May 22.

“at present over the entire area of the Jewish State as defined in the Resolution of the General Assembly of the 29th November, 1947. In addition, the Provisional Government exercises control over the city of Jaffa; Northwestern Galilee, including Acre, Zib, Base, and the Jewish settlements up to the Lebanese frontier; a strip of territory alongside the road from Hilda to Jerusalem; almost all of new Jerusalem; and of the Jewish quarter within the walls of the Old City of Jerusalem. The above areas, outside the territory of the State of Israel, are under the control of the military authorities of the State of Israel, who are strictly adhering to international regulations in this regard [1]. The Southern Negev is uninhabited desert over which no effective authority has ever existed.”

The Israeli Govt goes on to use these phrases in the document:

“the Government of the State of Israel operates in parts of Palestine outside the territory of the State of Israel” — “outside the area of the State” — “beyond the frontiers of the State of Israel”

Four instances where the Israeli Government, after having declared and been recognized, acknowledged limits to it’s territory. aka Borders, delineating the state of Israel from Palestine!

On 12 Aug 1948 an Israeli Government Proclamation says Jerusalem was “occupied”.

Jerusalem Declared Israel-Occupied City- by Israeli Government Proclamation 12 Aug 1948.

[1]

[1] “international regulations” at the time say;

Laws and Customs of War on Land (Hague IV); October 18, 1907 Art. 42 SECTION III
“Territory is considered occupied when it is actually placed under the authority of the hostile army. The occupation extends only to the territory where such authority has been established and can be exercised. “

On June 15, 1949, Israel’s position on its frontiers, statement to the Knesset by Foreign Minister Sharett.

June 15, 1949 Israel-s position on its frontiers VOLUMES 1-2: 1947-1974
“As for the frontier between the State of Israel and the area west of the Jordan which is not included in Israel…”

ShortLink to this section http://wp.me/pDB7k-KL#firsclaims
On the 31st Aug 1949 Israel made it’s first official claim to territories beyond the extent of its sovereign frontiers. After accepting UNGA resolution without registering any reservations. After declaring Israel Independent of any other entity including Palestine, per the borders of UNGA Res 181 and; enshrining UNGA Resolution in the Declaration. After being recognized as asked & declared. After confirming what was “outside the territory of the State of Israel” to the UNSC and by proclamation declaring Jerusalem “Israeli-Occupied”. After being accepted into the UN, as recognized and based on the Israeli Government statements to the UNSC prior to the UNSC recommendation. Israel’s claim was rebuffed, citing the Armistice Agreements, specifically the Armistice Demarcation Line is not to “be construed in any sense as a political or territorial boundary”.

UN Charter

Chapt XI DECLARATION REGARDING NON-SELF-GOVERNING TERRITORIES . Israeli Declaration “Israel…will be faithful to the principles of the Charter of the United Nations May 14th 1948.

Under the UN charter, the acquisition of territory by war is inadmissible. The only manner in which territory can be acquired is by legal annexation. Israel has never legally annexed any territory

Consecutive Israeli Governments have been LYING to it’s own citizens and the world for 62 years.

Contrary to the opinions on why the British took so long to recognize Israel, the British waited until an Israeli Government was elected and waited until Israel was accepted into the UN as Declared and as recognized by the majority of Nations. The British also took into consideration the statements by the Israeli Government, granting de jure recognition of State and elected Government, with conditions.

ISRAEL (GOVERNMENT DECISION) HC Deb 27 April 1950 vol 474 cc1137-41 “His Majesty’s Government have also decided to accord de jure recognition to the State of Israel, subject to explanations on two points corresponding to those described above in regard to the case of Jordan. These points are as follows. First, that His Majesty’s Government are unable to recognise the sovereignty of Israel over that part of Jerusalem which she occupies, though, pending a final determination of the status of the area, they recognise that Israel exercises de facto authority in it. Secondly, that His Majesty’s Government cannot regard the present boundaries between Israel, and Egypt, Jordan, Syria and the Lebanon as constituting the definitive frontiers of Israel, as these boundaries were laid 1139 down in the Armistice Agreements concluded severally between Israel and each of these States, and are subject to any modifications which may be agreed upon under the terms of those Agreements, or of any final settlements which may replace them.”

Nothing has yet replaced them. Israel has never legally annexed any territory to the “frontiers approved by the General Assembly of the United Nations in its Resolution of November 29, 1947”. It’s two attempts at annexation were condemned by UNSC Res 252 (+ 5 reminders) and UNSC Res 497, the Golan.

—–

These territories, “outside the territory of the State of Israel”, acquired by war, confirmed by the Israeli Government as occupied and never legally annexed to Israel, are quite simply not sovereign to Israel. As Professor Stephen M. Schwebel, after leaving office as a Judge of International Court of Justice, explains (citing Elihu Lauterpacht), a sovereign can ‘restore’ it’s own sovereign territory by war. It cannot ‘acquire’ territory by war.

Israel has never had to ‘restore’ any sovereign territory, it has never had any sovereign Israeli territory taken from it. In fact, failing to reach a peaceful settlement under Chapt VI of the UN Charter, Syria has a right to ‘restore’ the Golan by war. Likewise Egypt had the same right over the Sinai.

Detailed Partition Map.
Overlay for Google Earth with borders marked according to text of UNGA Res 181 (included)
1947 Partition Google Earth Overlay

November 9, 2010

Pushing the Hasbarrow for Israel.


…It’s actually quite simple. If it isn’t the actual Sovereign Territory of Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Egypt or Israel, then by default it is the territory of what remained of Palestine on May 15th 1948.
Non-self Governing Territories fall under the protection of the UN Charter Chapt XI…

ShortLink http://wp.me/pDB7k-Ik

The Hasbarrow Inc

End the Israeli occupation of Palestine

This is a snip
Click for full image with dialogue
Click for full image End the Israeli occupation of Palestine
This is another snip
Click for full image with dialogue
Click for full image End the Israeli occupation of Palestine


ShortLink http://wp.me/pDB7k-Ik#We-were-poor-and-happy

“We were poor and happy. The sort of happiness felt when a person as is turning desert into garden.”

Peres worked in two kibbutz – Kibbutz Alumot, which was in desert. In his time it was a failure. It didn’t blossom in the desert.

The other, Geva in the Jezreel Valley, which was NOT poor land or a desert. It was already blooming and had done so for centuries. Of the Jezreel Valley Bayard Taylor 1852 wrote “one of the richest districts in the world”

Laurence Oliphant 1887 wrote “the Valley of Esdraelon (Jezreel) was ‘a huge green lake of waving wheat, with its village-crowned mounds rising from it like islands; and it presents one of the most striking pictures of luxuriant fertility which it is possible to conceive’ “

Kibutz Alumot was a failure in his time, it didn’t turn the desert into garden. It was abandoned until 1967 and Kibbutz Geva was not in desert, it had been a garden for centuries.

What was his point? Israel allegedly turning the desert into a garden is IRRELEVANT to the actual legal status of Israel’s Internationally recognized sovereign extent.

See also Mark Twain Another Hasbara fairy tale, completely IRRELEVANT to the actual legal status of Israel’s Internationally recognized sovereign extent.

November 2, 2010

What will happen if the Palestinians Declare Sovereign Independence by the ’67 armistice lines?


…It’s actually quite simple. If it isn’t the “acknowledged” Sovereign Territory of Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Egypt or Israel, then it’s a territory of Palestine…

Shortlink http://wp.me/pDB7k-Gl

A declaration of Sovereign Independence according to the Armistice lines of ’67 by the Palestinians makes for a really interesting situation…

FACT : Palestine’s name has not changed since Roman era. Under the Ottoman rule, the region was called Palestine. Under the Mandate, the region was called Palestine. Jordan was declared Independent of Palestine in 1946. What remained was still called Palestine. Israel was declared Independent of Palestine in 1948. . What remained was and is still called “Palestine”. The UNSC resolutions call for “peace in Palestine”, never peace in Israel. The wars have not been fought in Israel.

FACT : Palestine today is comprised by default, of the territories outside of and bound by the actual Internationally recognized extent of Lebanese, Syrian, Jordanian, Egyptian & Israeli sovereignty. The legal status of Palestine has not changed since Israel was declared independent of Palestine on May 14th 1948. Armistice Demarcation Lines and Cease Fire lines have changed, neither of which have changed any borders.

FACT : Jerusalem was never instituted as a corpus separatum by the UN. It was not a part of Israel’s declared or recognized sovereignty. Jerusalem’s status has never legally changed from being a part of Palestine for over 2,000 years. Far longer than the entire existence of the Jewish Kingdom.

FACT :Territory can only be ‘acquired’ by legal annexation. The territories Israel illegally acquired by war by 1950 and has never legally annexed, are still legally a part of Palestine. (about 33% of the territory Israel claims as it’s own). It is inadmissible to ‘acquire’ territory by war. According to Schwebel/Lauterpacht, a state may ‘restore’ its sovereignty over its own territory by war. E.g., Syria has the right to ‘restore’ the Golan.

FACT : No actual borders were changed in ’67. Armistice Demarcation Lines are not borders unless they follow the actual borders existing before the armistice or unless “occupied territories” are legally annexed during the period of the armistice.

FACT : A Declaration of Sovereign Independence only comes into effect when the territories declared are completely free of occupation. (example ..“The Act of Independence will become effective at one minute after six o’clock on the evening of 14 May 1948, Washington time” After the British occupation/Mandate ended.) In order to come into effect, Israel would have to withdraw from all of the territories declared by Palestine.

FACT : A Palestinian declaration according to the ’67 armistice lines and subsequent recognition as an Independent state, will not change the extent of Israel’s actual Internationally recognized declared sovereignty. There will still be a requirement to legally annex the territories between Israel’s legally recognized borders of 1948 and the border of Palestine for them to become sovereign to Israel.

By declaring Sovereign Independence according to the ’67 armistice lines, territories not declared as sovereign by the Palestinians and not declared as sovereign or legally annexed to Israel, would remain a part of Palestine until their status is legally changed via legal annexation.

Israel will finally have to either legally annex them, (legal annexation requires an agreement of the legal citizens, sans citizens of the annexing party) OR occupy them. As the Occupying Power, Israel would then be duty bound to PROTECT THEM until they in turn have the ability to become independent or decide to be annexed. However, as an Independent Sovereign State, Palestine would also be Regional Power. As such it would also have the same right to legally claim, annex or occupy the same territories.

Conundrum : If the Palestinians declare themselves independent by the boundaries of the ’67 armistice and call their state Palestine, what will the remaining, tiny, entity be called? And what are the ramifications if it erupts in civil war, outside the sovereignty of either entity? (HERE for the possible ramifications for Israeli citizens).

Which Regional Power would take over. It could ask to be legally annexed by one of the Regional Powers, as the Palestinians requested of TransJordan in 1950.

Which Regional Power would it trust? One who has for 64 years usurped the Palestinians, denying them RoR, razing their homes, villages, farms? Or the party who would sacrifice some 50% of it’s rightful territories, in order that there be peace, helping Israel extract itself from the illegal, facts on the ground black hole it has dug for itself and it’s illegally settled citizens?

If neither Israel or Palestine annex, hundreds of thousands of people living in the remaining, tiny, entity, many of whom are currently Israeli citizens, will be stateless.

If Israel does annex, it must be by agreement with the remaining tiny entity. This action alone would show the world that these territories were never a part of Israel. I.e., it has been bullsh*tting for 64 years. (Not that Israel ever seems to care about being shown as deceitful, as long as it has land).

Palestine would have just as much right as Israel to legally annex. Would Israel go ballistic? Kick the sh*te out of ye olde china shoppe? Ask yourself….. Who will stop them? The US, mightiest nation on earth, can’t even stop Israel’s illegal settlement program!

Older Posts »

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.