So why do people hate Israel?

[senojekips]

Hasbara Trolls

Hasbara: Is supposedly word of Hebrew origin basically meaning "truth is the truth" or "explanation" although there is no real exact translation that I can find. A rather odd word considering that in it's most recent connotation today it is used to describe a blatant cover up, or outright lies and distortions.

About the time that cheap Internet connections became readily accessible to the man in the street and cheap movie cameras became a reality, many of Israel's earlier Human rights abuses, atrocities and lies were suddenly being dragged out and exposed to the previously unknowing public, for the first time. To counter this sudden barrage of what Israel had previously taken great pains to keep concealed from the rest of the world, the Israeli Foreign Ministry and various pro Zionist/Israel groups set about setting up loosely linked "Hasbara" groups consisting of pro-Zionist supporters who were asked to try and either, explain away the Israeli crimes, (tell only the Israeli point of view, or just straight out, lie about it). Failing that, discredit those who published any critical information regarding Israel, and wherever possible, have the material removed from the net by by flooding ISPs with complaints claiming,... Yes, you guessed it, "Anti-Semitism". This was especially noticeable on such public sites as YouTube etc, where a number of factual videos showing Israel for what it was and still is, were removed,... They have nearly all since been replaced, and YouTube is now at least aware of what is going on.

Most of these misguided persons see it as a voluntary service to Zionism and/or Israel, but there have been a number of cases of individuals actually being paid by pro Zionist groups, or receiving "in kind" support, free internet accounts, promise of "educational" trips to Israel or other inducements. As well as which there are official Israeli government groups often staffed by members of the military, as a "service to the State"

The most interesting question, the answer of which would give you some indication as to this country's motives, is one you must ask yourself, "how many other governments in the world have to induce their own citizens and supporters to help try and cover up past atrocities, breaches of international law and crimes against humanity"? Many of these acts already subject to UN resolutions, and about a third of them binding resolutions of the Security Council, and all of them condemned by International Human rights groups.

As you get into the subject it can be quite interesting reading, just seeing the extents to which these clowns will go. For example, many of the better networked groups are based in Universities and colleges where they actually publish printed guides as to how to best present your case, the use of psychology and tactics, pointing out what to say and more importantly what not to say, how to "minimise" certain damaging words, the use of standard phrases and replies and of course, what subjects and terms to avoid, and failing all that, how to best derail the subject. Their groups also provide coaching sessions and have mentors to aid those who find they have talked themselves into a corner etc.

Does any of the above sound familiar? It should. (Yes, other than those obvious Hasbara trolls who come here trying to justify the unjustifiable, even I have been using some of their tactics. Fight fire with fire)

These people are in fact the modern day Internet equivalent of the 1930s-1945 pro Nazi propagandists, and the more recent Holocaust deniers, all rolled into one, who both attempting to excuse Israel's appalling past record of war crimes and Human Rights abuses and make the ludicrous claim the they (the Israelis) are somehow the "victims" in all this.

 

[Del Boy]

Nice try Seno, but useless. That organisation (globalresearch) is just a leftwing anti Israel (in fact anti West) group, "rife with anti-Jewish conspiracy theory and Holocaust denial." It's founder, Michel Chossudovsky, is not without critisism. In his own country , Canada, Terry O'Neill included him in his list of "Canada's nuttiest professors, those whose absurdity stands head and shoulders above their colleagues."

It's time that you start looking for real facts instead of writings you like.

If Israel was what you describe her to be there would have been a revolution long time ago. Instead, most Jews, Arabs, Christians, Druze and Bedouins love Israel otherwise they would have fled to your beloved Palestine.

The reason you think why I was away is wrong. See, it's the same old song. You THINK you know, but you are far from the truth.

Among other things I was working on my oldtimer (1976 Lincoln Mark IV), upgraded Windows XP to 7 and using XBMC to catalog my movies (1.642 as of today) , MediaMonkey for my music (about 10.000 songs) and Foobar2000 to play them. I have also installed X-plane 9 but didn't have much time to play with it.

Tip: you can buy DVD's and CD's at Amazon UK for 1 pence plus shipping.

ABSOLUTELY. Same ol', same ol '. Being attacked by Seno is like being savaged by a dead sheep.:thumb: He now appears to be trying to learn Hebrew - one word at a time!!

 

[D.J]

Ever ask yourself why during the 30 year period - between 1917 to 1947 - thousands of Jews throughout the world woke up one morning and decided to leave their homes and go to Palestine? The majority did this because they heard that a future national home for the Jewish people was being established in Palestine, on the basis of the League of Nations obligation under the “Mandate for Palestine” document. The “Mandate for Palestine,” an historical League of Nations document, laid down the Jewish legal right to settle anywhere in western Palestine, between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea, an entitlement unaltered in international law. The “Mandate for Palestine” was not a naive vision briefly embraced by the international community. Fifty-one member countries – the entire League of Nations – unanimously declared on July 24, 1922:

“Whereas recognition has been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country.”​

Any attempt to negate the Jewish people’s right to Palestine - Eretz-Israel, and to deny them access and control in the area designated for the Jewish people by the League of Nations is a serious infringement of international law.

The legally binding document was conferred on April 24, 1920 at the San Remo Conference, and its terms outlined in the Treaty of Sèvres on August 10, 1920. The Mandate’s terms were finalized and unanimously approved on July 24, 1922, by the Council of the League of Nations, which was comprised at that time of 51 countries, and became operational on September 29, 1923.
The “Mandate for Palestine” was not a naive vision briefly embraced by the international community in blissful unawareness of Arab opposition to the very notion of Jewish historical rights in Palestine. The Mandate weathered the test of time: On April 18, 1946, when the League of Nations was dissolved and its assets and duties transferred to the United Nations, the international community, in essence, reaffirmed the validity of this international accord and reconfirmed that the terms for a Jewish National Home were the will of the international community, a “sacred trust” – despite the fact that by then it was patently clear that the Arabs opposed a Jewish National Home, no matter what the form.

Many seem to confuse the “Mandate for Palestine” (The Trust), with the British Mandate (The Trustee). The “Mandate for Palestine” is a League of Nations document that laid down the Jewish legal rights in Palestine. The British Mandate, on the other hand, was entrusted by the League of Nations with the responsibility to administrate the area delineated by the “Mandate for Palestine.” ​

Great Britain (The Mandatory or Trustee) did turn over its responsibility to the United Nations as of May 14, 1948. However, the legal force of the League of Nations’ “Mandate for Palestine” (The Trust) was not terminated with the end of the British Mandate. Rather, the Trust was transferred over to the United Nations. Arabs, the UN and its organs, and lately the International Court of Justice (ICJ) as well, have repeatedly claimed that the Palestinians are a native people – so much so that almost everyone takes it for granted. The problem is that a stateless Palestinian people is a fabrication. The word Palestine is not even Arabic.

In a report by His Majesty’s Government in the United Kingdom to the Council of the League of Nations on the administration of Palestine and Trans-Jordan for the year 1938, the British made it clear: Palestine is not a State, it is the name of a geographical area. Palestine is a name coined by the Romans around 135 CE from the name of a seagoing Aegean people who settled on the coast of Canaan in antiquity – the Philistines. The name was chosen to replace Judea, as a sign that Jewish sovereignty had been eradicated following the Jewish Revolts against Rome. In the course of time, the Latin name Philistia was further bastardized into Palistina or Palestine. During the next 2,000 years Palestine was never an independent state belonging to any people, nor did a Palestinian people distinct from other Arabs appear during 1,300 years of Muslim hegemony in Palestine under Arab and Ottoman rule. During that rule, local Arabs were actually considered part of, and subject to, the authority of Greater Syria ( Suriyya al-Kubra). Historically, before the Arabs fabricated the concept of Palestinian peoplehood as an exclusively Arab phenomenon, no such group existed. This is substantiated in countless official British Mandate-vintage documents that speak of the Jews and the Arabs of Palestine – not Jews and Palestinians.

In fact, before local Jews began calling themselves Israelis in 1948 (when the name “Israel” was chosen for the newly-established Jewish State), the term “Palestine” applied almost exclusively to Jews and the institutions founded by new Jewish immigrants in the first half of the 20th century, before the state’s independence. Encouraged by their success at historical revisionism and brainwashing the world with the “Big Lie” of a Palestinian people, Palestinian Arabs have more recently begun to claim they are the descendants of the Philistines and even the Stone Age Canaanites. Based on that myth, they can claim to have been “victimized” twice by the Jews: in the conquest of Canaan by the Israelites and again by the Israelis in modern times – a total fabrication.Archeologists explain that the Philistines were a Mediterranean people who settled along the coast of Canaan in 1100 BCE. They have no connection to the Arab nation, a desert people who emerged from the Arabian Peninsula. As if that myth were not enough, former PLO Chairman Yasir Arafat also claimed, “Palestinian Arabs are descendants of the Jebusites,” who were displaced when King David conquered Jerusalem. Arafat also argued that “Abraham was an Iraqi.” One Christmas Eve, Arafat declared that “Jesus was a Palestinian,” a preposterous claim that echoes the words of Hanan Ashrawi, a Christian Arab who, in an interview during the 1991 Madrid Conference, said: “Jesus Christ was born in my country, in my land,” and claimed that she was “the descendant of the first Christians,” disciples who spread the gospel around Bethlehem some 600 years before the Arab conquest. If her claims were true, it would be tantamount to confessing that she is a Jew!

Contradictions abound; Palestinian leaders claim to be descended from the Canaanites, the Philistines, the Jebusites and the first Christians. They also “hijacked” Jesus and ignored his Jewishness, at the same time claiming the Jews never were a people and never built the Holy Temples in Jerusalem.

 

[D.J]

The artificiality of a Palestinian identity is reflected in the attitudes and actions of neighboring Arab nations who never established a Palestinian state themselves.
The rhetoric by Arab leaders on behalf of the Palestinians rings hollow. Arabs in neighboring states, who control 99.9 percent of the Middle East land, have never recognized a Palestinian entity. They have always considered Palestine and its inhabitants part of the great “Arab nation,” historically and politically as an integral part of Greater Syria a designation that extended to both sides of the Jordan River. In the 1950s, Jordan simply annexed the West Bank since the population there was viewed as the brethren of the Jordanians. Jordan’s official narrative of “Jordanian state-building” attests to this fact:

“Jordanian identity underlies the significant and fundamental common denominator that makes it inclusive of Palestinian identity, particularly in view of the shared historic social and political development of the people on both sides of the Jordan. ... The Jordan government, in view of the historical and political relationship with the West Bank ... granted all Palestinian refugees on its territory full citizenship rights while protecting and upholding their political rights as Palestinians (Right of Return or compensation).”

The Arabs never established a Palestinian state when the UN in 1947 recommended to partition Palestine, and to establish “an Arab and a Jewish state” (not a Palestinian state, it should be noted). Nor did the Arabs recognize or establish a Palestinian state during the two decades prior to the Six-Day War when the West Bank was under Jordanian control and the Gaza Strip was under Egyptian control; nor did the Palestinian Arabs clamor for autonomy or independence during those years under Jordanian and Egyptian rule.
The creation of an Arab state in eastern Palestine (today Jordan) on 77 percent of the landmass of the original Mandate intended for a Jewish National Home in no way changed the status of Jews west of the Jordan River, nor did it inhibit their right to settle anywhere in western Palestine, the area between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea.

The “Mandate for Palestine” document did not set final borders. It left this for the Mandatory to stipulate in a binding appendix to the final document in the form of a memorandum. However, Article 6 of the “Mandate” clearly states:

“The Administration of Palestine, while ensuring that the rights and position of other sections of the population are not prejudiced, shall facilitate Jewish immigration under suitable conditions and shall encourage, in co-operation with the Jewish agency referred to in Article 4, close settlement by Jews on the land, including State lands and waste lands not required for public purposes.”

Article 25 of the “Mandate for Palestine” entitled the Mandatory to change the terms of the Mandate in the territory east of the Jordan River:

“In the territories lying between the Jordan and the eastern boundary of Palestine as ultimately determined, the Mandatory shall be entitled, with the consent of the Council of the League of Nations, to postpone or withhold application of such provision of this Mandate as he may consider inapplicable to the existing local conditions ...”

These documents are the last legally binding documents regarding the status of what is commonly called “the West Bank and Gaza.”

The September 16, 1922 memorandum is also the last modification of the official terms of the Mandate on record by the League of Nations or by its legal successor – the United Nations – in accordance with Article 27 of the Mandate that states unequivocally:

“The consent of the Council of the League of Nations is required for any modification of the terms of this mandate.”

​

United Nations Charter recognizes the UN’s obligation to uphold the commitments of its predecessor – the League of Nations.

The Mandate survived the demise of the League of Nations. Article 80 of the UN Charter implicitly recognizes the “Mandate for Palestine” of the League of Nations.
This Mandate granted Jews the irrevocable right to settle anywhere in Palestine, the area between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea, a right unaltered in international law and valid to this day. Jewish settlements in Judea and Samaria (i.e. the West Bank), Gaza and the whole of Jerusalem are legal.
The International Court of Justice reaffirmed the meaning and validity of Article 80 in three separate cases:

· ICJ Advisory Opinion of July 11, 1950: in the “question concerning the International States of South West Africa.”

· ICJ Advisory Opinion of June 21, 1971: “When the League of Nations was dissolved, the raison d’etre (French: “reason for being”) and original object of these obligations remained. Since their fulfillment did not depend on the existence of the League, they could not be brought to an end merely because the supervisory organ had ceased to exist. ... The International Court of Justice has consistently recognized that the Mandate survived the demise of the League (of Nations).”

· ICJ Advisory Opinion of July 9, 2004: regarding the “legal consequences of the construction of a wall in the occupied Palestinian territory.”

In other words, neither the ICJ nor the UN General Assembly can arbitrarily change the status of Jewish settlement as set forth in the “Mandate for Palestine,” an international accord that has never been amended. All of western Palestine, from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea, including the West Bank and Gaza, remains open to Jewish settlement under international law.

 

[BritinBritain]

ABSOLUTELY. Same ol', same ol '. Being attacked by Seno is like being savaged by a dead sheep.:thumb: He now appears to be trying to learn Hebrew - one word at a time!!

Hold up, the living dead is rattling his chains again. Someone should put that stake back through his heart.

 

[senojekips]

The artificiality of a Palestinian identity is reflected in the attitudes and actions of neighboring Arab nations who never established a Palestinian state themselves.

The dribblings of an idiot.

What chance did the Palestinians or any one else have, whilst they were obeying the law and waiting for the formation of the Pan Arab state agreed to by the Brits, the Zionist Terror groups drove out the officially mandated administration who had just finished fighting one war, and then encouraged the illegal immigration by European Jews who subsequently drove the native people into the neighbouring countries where they remain to this day in defiance of International Law
[quote=Israel Law Resource Center]
Israeli Violations of International law: CREATION OF THE STATE OF ISRAEL (1947-1954)*

1. ILLEGAL ACQUISITION OF LAND BY FORCE: Israel annexes land occupied by force during 1948 war (lands external to those (illegally) given by the UN partition plan (that was never ratified.) laws & principles violated, international response.
2. FORBIDDING CIVILIANS THE RIGHT TO RETURN TO THEIR HOMES FOLLOWING THE END OF ARMED CONFLICT: Israeli government enacts laws, and employs its military to keep aproximately 750,000 Palestinian Arab civilians from returning to their homes following the end of fighting both in 1948 and in the occupied territories in 1967. Israel then violates UN resolutions ordering them to respect Palestinian's right to return to their homes (laws & principles violated, international response).
3. ILLEGAL POPULATION TRANSFER: Israel settles Israeli citizens in hundreds of Israeli settlements on occupied land not originally given to them in the UN Partition Plan (laws & principles violated, international response).
5. DESTRUCTION OF HOLY PLACES, AND INTERFERING WITH MINISTERS OF RELIGION PERFORMING THEIR RELIGIOUS DUTIES: Israeli forces have destroyed Muslim holy places, and interfered with the religious work of Muslim Imams (ministers) (laws & principles violated, international response).
7. ILLEGAL PRACTICE OF COLLECTIVE PUNISHMENT: Israel repeatedly practices collective punishment against Palestinian acts of rebellion wherein an entire community is punished for the actions of a few (laws & principles violated, international response).[/quote]

“Jordanian---snip---

WTF did that come from? What has Jordan got to do with the illegal Zionist occupation of Palestine?

In other words, neither the ICJ nor the UN General Assembly can arbitrarily change the status of Jewish settlement as set forth in the “Mandate for Palestine,” an international accord that has never been amended.

They don't have to, for the same reason that it was never voted upon by the UN, no one had the right to arbitrarily promise the land of another people to a third party, any agreement to do this was illegal. No where is it stated in the UN Charter that this can occur.

All of western Palestine, from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea, including the West Bank and Gaza, remains open to Jewish settlement under international law.

Absolute rubbish,... You are telling lies again, and to an audience who is already aware of that fact.

Israeli Violations of International law: ISRAELI OCCUPATION (1967-present)
8. ILLEGAL MILITARY OCCUPATION: The current Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories is illegal. Military actions and occupations are considered legal only if they are based on self-defense (as Israel claims) or are designed to benefit the native population of the occupied areas, but it is now clear that Israel's occupation is illegal because Israeli implementation of it clearly is about:

• (1) Acquisition of land into Israel by force, and
• (2) Economic exploitation of the occupied areas via building up de facto Annexation on occupied lands --
  • (A) Extensive modification of local laws, and
  • (B) Building Israeli settlements on occupied lands (illegal population transfer),
  • (C) Building separation barrier not on border but through Palestinian communities displacing over 200,000 Palestinian civilians separating them from their families, work, schools, hospitals, etc.
• (3) Inhumane suppression of rebellion is implemented through --
  • (A) Practice of Collective Punishment, and
  • (B) Extensive violations of Palestinian Human Rights.

All 7 of these policy actions are illegal according to international law (see details below), which thus makes the occupation itself illegal. Press HERE for more details and quotes from the law concerning the legality of Israel's occupation.
1. ILLEGAL ACQUISITION OF LAND BY FORCE: Israel annexes land taken by force during the 1967 war (East Jerusalem and Golan Heights) (laws & principles violated, international response).
2. FORBIDDING CIVILIANS THE RIGHT TO RETURN TO THEIR HOMES FOLLOWING THE END OF ARMED CONFLICT: Israeli government enacts laws, and employs its military to keep Palestinian Arab civilians from returning to their homes following the end of fighting in the occupied territories in 1967. Israel then violates UN resolutions ordering them to respect Palestinian's right to return to their homes (laws & principles violated, international response).
3. ILLEGAL POPULATION TRANSFER: Israel settles Israeli citizens in hundreds of Israeli settlements on occupied Palestinian land (laws & principles violated, international response).
4. ILLEGAL MODIFICATION OF LOCAL LAW: Israel radically modifies local law following 1967 occupation beyond what is allowable under international law (violating Palestinian human rights and to the benefit of Israel's economy and the Israeli settlements on occupied Palestinian lands, and actually creating de facto annexation of much of the occupied territories) (laws & principles violated, international response).
6. ILLEGAL DE FACTO ANNEXATION: Israel creates de facto annexation of much of Palestinian territories occupied during 1967 war (as it radically alters local laws in order to apply Israeli law to the Israeli settlements on occupied Palestinian lands, and in violation of Palestinian rights of self-determination largely to the benefit of the Israeli economy) (laws & principles violated, international response).
7. ILLEGAL PRACTICE OF COLLECTIVE PUNISHMENT: Israel repeatedly practices collective punishment against Palestinian acts of rebellion wherein an entire community is punished for the actions of a few (laws & principles violated, international response).
9. VIOLATIONS OF RIGHT TO SELF-DETERMINATION: Israel significantly violates the inalienable rights of self-determination of the Palestinian people (when it expropriated significant amounts of Palestinian land from Palestinians to build Israeli settlements, separation barriers, highways, and other structures which benefit Israeli citizens and businesses, but which also severely interfere with Palestinians' ability to work and do business, go to school, access medical facilities, and visit with members of their own families) (laws & principles violated, international response).
15. GENOCIDE: Although numbers of massacres and other lethal methodologies have been documented throughout the history of the Zionists and the State of Israel, evidence suggests that the overall intention of the Zionists and the government of Israel was to drive the Palestinian Arab people out of the area rather than to destroy them as is required by the definition of Genocide. On the other hand, there is some evidence that Israel intended to destroy the society and culture and economy of those Arabs that refused to leave, which under the modern definition, this would be considered to be Genocide. (laws & principles violated, international response).

 

[senojekips]

Hold up, the living dead is rattling his chains again. Someone should put that stake back through his heart.

I couldn't see his Bullsh!t, I've got him on ignore. I guess he must be on day release, and already he's off his medication. Obviously he's still miffed that I pointed out what a liar he is, last time he was out.

 

[D.J]

Professor Eugene Rostow concurred with the ICJ’s opinion as to the “sacredness” of trusts such as the “Mandate for Palestine”:

“‘A trust’ – as in Article 80 of the UN Charter – does not end because the trustee dies ... the Jewish right of settlement in the whole of western Palestine – the area west of the Jordan – survived the British withdrawal in 1948. ... They are parts of the mandate territory, now legally occupied by Israel with the consent of the Security Council.”

The British Mandate left intact the Jewish right to settle in Judea, Samaria and the Gaza Strip. Explains Professor Rostow:

“This right is protected by Article 80 of the United Nations Charter, which provides that unless a trusteeship agreement is agreed upon (which was not done for the Palestine Mandate), nothing in the chapter shall be construed in and of itself to alter in any manner the rights whatsoever of any states or any peoples or the terms of existing international instruments to which members of the United Nations may respectively be parties.
“The Mandates of the League of Nations have a special status in international law. They are considered to be trusts, indeed ‘sacred trusts.’
“Under international law, neither Jordan nor the Palestinian Arab ‘people’ of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip have a substantial claim to the sovereign possession of the occupied territories.”

It is interesting to learn how Article 80 made its way into the UN Charter. Professor Rostow recalls:

“I am indebted to my learned friend Dr. Paul Riebenfeld, who has for many years been my mentor on the history of Zionism, for reminding me of some of the circumstances which led to the adoption of Article 80 of the Charter. Strong Jewish delegations representing differing political tendencies within Jewry attended the San Francisco Conference in 1945. Rabbi Stephen S. Wise, Peter Bergson, Eliahu Elath, Professors Ben-Zion Netanayu and A. S. Yehuda, and Harry Selden were among the Jewish representatives. Their mission was to protect the Jewish right of settlement in Palestine under the mandate against erosion in a world of ambitious states. Article 80 was the result of their efforts.”

You think you know the truth but you cannot see the wood for the trees. I would suggest that you spend a little more time studying Middle East history in more substantial detail.

 

[BritinBritain]

I couldn't see his Bullsh!t, I've got him on ignore. I guess he must be on day release, and already he's off his medication. Obviously he's still miffed that I pointed out what a liar he is, last time he was out.

I never mentioned his name, yet you knew who I was talking about. :bravo:

I don't have him on ignore because its like coming across a road accident, its hard to look away.

 

[senojekips]

Oh yes, I know the truth. History? which history are you talking about the Israeli version of history, or the facts as recognised by the international community?

You last blatant lie is an indication as to who needs to wake up and learn a bit about what is going on.

"All of western Palestine, from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea, including the West Bank and Gaza, remains open to Jewish settlement under international law"

Sorry to inform you. but the ICJ has already ruled on all occupied territories right back to those stolen in the 1948 war, and that their continued occupation is illegal as already posted here. Secondly International law clearly states: "Occupation Must Never Lead To Sovereignty over Occupied or Conquered Lands of the Enemy People or Nation."

The British mandate was only responsible for that which happened whilst they were the administrators, they left nothing, when they were forced out by Zionist terror groups, everything went with them as they were the only people mandated. No Jewish homeland was ever put in place during this time, as the Zionist terror groups drove the Brits out before any arrangement could be worked out. A plan which was stillborn anyway, as it would have required the agreement of the native population as the mandate stated clearly that the Brits must administer the Palestinian territories in the interests of it's native population.

The subsequent illegal occupation and war were illegal as nowhere was it stated that the Zionist terror groups who drove the Brits out, could just take over the process themselves. They were not mandated, so in effect it could be successfully argued that the whole of Israel is actually only an occupied territory.

Resolution 181 was only ever a "recommendation" it was never ratified, and could not be ratified under international law, unless agreed to by the native people of Palestine, or Canadian people in the case of Canada etc. The Balfour declaration (basis of your sacred trust) was similarly flawed, as the land had already promised as a pan Arab state five years prior to the Balfour declaration being mooted.

 

[D.J]

I'm not talking about the British Mandate but the Mandate for Palestine
A legally binding document published by the League of Nations, the forerunner of the United Nations.

The Mandate was subsequently protected by Article 80 of the United Nations Charter that recognizes the continued validity of the rights granted to all states or peoples, or already existing international instruments including those adopted by the League of Nations. The International Court of Justice has consistently recognized that the Mandate survived the demise of the League of Nations. Any attempt to negate the Jewish people’s rights to Palestine, and to deny them access and control in the area designated for the Jewish people by the League of Nations, is in serious conflict with the Mandate’s legal framework.


​

Article 5 of the Mandate clearly states that "The Mandatory (Great Britain) shall be responsible for seeing that no Palestine territory shall be ceded or leased to, or in any way placed under the control of the Government of any foreign power." The territory of Palestine was exclusively assigned for the Jewish National Home.

Article 6 states that “the Administration of Palestine, while ensuring that the rights and position of other sections of the population are not prejudiced, shall facilitate Jewish immigration under suitable conditions and shall encourage, in co-operation with the Jewish agency referred to in Article 4, close settlement by Jews on the land, including State lands and waste lands not required for public purposes.”

Until the United Nations remembers and accepts these obligations, a genuine peace between an Israeli government and its Arab neighbors is likely to remain elusive.

 

[senojekips]

I'm not talking about the British Mandate but the Mandate for Palestine
A legally binding document published by the League of Nations, the forerunner of the United Nations.
---snip---

The rubbish you submit is totally meaningless, and about what we could expect from a person who willingly participated in a aggressive military force who willingly shoots innocent civilians and supports the oppression of a nation by a society that actively promotes Ethnic cleansing as did the Nazis whom they so eagerly emulate

The "Mandate for Palestine" was to be administered by the British and it is one and the same as I mention, and would have completed the job, had it not been for Zionist terror groups who murdered innocent civilians and the mandated administrators driving them out before their work could be done.

It might pay you to remember that deliberations of the league of nations carry no more weight than those of the UN that Israel so willingly ignores and has done for over 60 years.

It was determined by the Brits that there were no "waste lands" etc and that Palestine was fully populated taking into account future population growth. This had already been noted by earlier Zionist visitors and reported to their leadership.
As for Israel's compliance:

Thus the state of Israel places itself straight away above international law.
Imposed on the U.N. on the 11 May 1949 by the will of the United States, the State of Israel was only admitted on three conditions :

1 - Not to touch the status of Jerusalem;

2 - To allow Palestinian Arabs to come back to their homes;

3 - To respect the borders fixed by the partition decision.
​

Speaking about this U.N. resolution on "sharing", taken well before its admission, Ben Gurion declares:

"The State of Israel considers the U.N. resolution of 29 November 1947 to be null and void."​

Don't even start going on about people not honouring sacred trusts etc. The Zionists have never honoured any of their obligations to anyone but themselves. Israel's credibility, like your own is completely non existent.

I'm not going to argue with you, as everything you mention has been covered several times already and being that Israel has the worlds record for condemnatory resolutions against it nothing you can say will hide the "Oh so obvious truth". More than China, and such sh!tholes as Somalia and Zimbabwe.
​

 

[VDKMS]

Rubbish,... I have NEVER stated that anyplace was my "homeland" in fact I have gone to great lengths to show that I don't have a "home land" in the sense you are talking about, when I said such things as (I can't claim places in England, Holland or Eastern Europe etc.).

The term "homeland" is totally meaningless in respect to where some of your ancestors may have lived at some time. If anything, your homeland is that place where you live legally at this time, or if you choose, your place of birth. You could claim yours is Spain unless of course you are still a Belgian subject.

Every one of these replies has been covered in depth and disproven by both myself and others, most of it more than once.

So, this means that Israel is the homeland for almost all Israelis because there are born there. Many descendants from Palestinian refugees live in Syria, Lebanon and Jordan, so that means it is their homeland?

I am a Belgian citizen living in Spain.

 

[VDKMS]

The dribblings of an idiot.

What chance did the Palestinians or any one else have, whilst they were obeying the law and waiting for the formation of the Pan Arab state agreed to by the Brits, the Zionist Terror groups drove out the officially mandated administration who had just finished fighting one war, and then encouraged the illegal immigration by European Jews who subsequently drove the native people into the neighbouring countries where they remain to this day in defiance of International Law
[quote=Israel Law Resource Center]
Israeli Violations of International law: CREATION OF THE STATE OF ISRAEL (1947-1954)*

1. ILLEGAL ACQUISITION OF LAND BY FORCE: Israel annexes land occupied by force during 1948 war (lands external to those (illegally) given by the UN partition plan (that was never ratified.) laws & principles violated, international response.
2. FORBIDDING CIVILIANS THE RIGHT TO RETURN TO THEIR HOMES FOLLOWING THE END OF ARMED CONFLICT: Israeli government enacts laws, and employs its military to keep aproximately 750,000 Palestinian Arab civilians from returning to their homes following the end of fighting both in 1948 and in the occupied territories in 1967. Israel then violates UN resolutions ordering them to respect Palestinian's right to return to their homes (laws & principles violated, international response).
3. ILLEGAL POPULATION TRANSFER: Israel settles Israeli citizens in hundreds of Israeli settlements on occupied land not originally given to them in the UN Partition Plan (laws & principles violated, international response).
5. DESTRUCTION OF HOLY PLACES, AND INTERFERING WITH MINISTERS OF RELIGION PERFORMING THEIR RELIGIOUS DUTIES: Israeli forces have destroyed Muslim holy places, and interfered with the religious work of Muslim Imams (ministers) (laws & principles violated, international response).
7. ILLEGAL PRACTICE OF COLLECTIVE PUNISHMENT: Israel repeatedly practices collective punishment against Palestinian acts of rebellion wherein an entire community is punished for the actions of a few (laws & principles violated, international response).

WTF did that come from? What has Jordan got to do with the illegal Zionist occupation of Palestine?

They don't have to, for the same reason that it was never voted upon by the UN, no one had the right to arbitrarily promise the land of another people to a third party, any agreement to do this was illegal. No where is it stated in the UN Charter that this can occur.

Absolute rubbish,... You are telling lies again, and to an audience who is already aware of that fact.

These are opinions beaten by the facts that I and D.J. have given. Although I admit that D.J.'s facts are better than mine.

May I remind you that your beloved website says :

Important Disclaimers about legal advice and claims of anti-Semitism - Please Read !

DISCLAIMER ABOUT LEGAL ADVISE:
The content of this website is for informational purposes only.
The information from this website cannot be considered to be legal advice at all.​

 

[VDKMS]

Oh yes, I know the truth. History? which history are you talking about the Israeli version of history, or the facts as recognised by the international community?

You last blatant lie is an indication as to who needs to wake up and learn a bit about what is going on.


Sorry to inform you. but the ICJ has already ruled on all occupied territories right back to those stolen in the 1948 war, and that their continued occupation is illegal as already posted here. Secondly International law clearly states: "Occupation Must Never Lead To Sovereignty over Occupied or Conquered Lands of the Enemy People or Nation."

The British mandate was only responsible for that which happened whilst they were the administrators, they left nothing, when they were forced out by Zionist terror groups, everything went with them as they were the only people mandated. No Jewish homeland was ever put in place during this time, as the Zionist terror groups drove the Brits out before any arrangement could be worked out. A plan which was stillborn anyway, as it would have required the agreement of the native population as the mandate stated clearly that the Brits must administer the Palestinian territories in the interests of it's native population.

The subsequent illegal occupation and war were illegal as nowhere was it stated that the Zionist terror groups who drove the Brits out, could just take over the process themselves. They were not mandated, so in effect it could be successfully argued that the whole of Israel is actually only an occupied territory.

Resolution 181 was only ever a "recommendation" it was never ratified, and could not be ratified under international law, unless agreed to by the native people of Palestine, or Canadian people in the case of Canada etc. The Balfour declaration (basis of your sacred trust) was similarly flawed, as the land had already promised as a pan Arab state five years prior to the Balfour declaration being mooted.

Again you are not telling everything. May I remind you that the UN Security Counsel rejected draft S/1997/1991 and draft S/1997/2412 which sought to call Israeli settlements as illegal and that the ICJ did not condemn Israel but only gave advisory.

Also, the UN Charter does not grant the General Assembly or the ICJ the authority to assign or affect ‘ownership’ of the Territories.

Another thing : occupied land lays beyound your borders, but the eastern border of Israel is not yet defined. The green line is not the definite border of Israel and awaits the outcome of talks. What if it is decided that the definitive border is the eastern border of the West Bank?

Resolution 181 doesn't matter. Israel became an official member state of the UN on 11-05-1949.

 

[VDKMS]

The rubbish you submit is totally meaningless, and about what we could expect from a person who willingly participated in a aggressive military force who willingly shoots innocent civilians and supports the oppression of a nation by a society that actively promotes Ethnic cleansing as did the Nazis whom they so eagerly emulate

Your talking about Palestine! They shoot innocent Israeli (and other) civilians, they support etnic cleansing (as stated in their covenant to expell all the Jews) and they act as Nazis, no freedom of speech, Jews assaulted, history and geographic textbooks distorted.

The "Mandate for Palestine" was to be administered by the British and it is one and the same as I mention, and would have completed the job, had it not been for Zionist terror groups who murdered innocent civilians and the mandated administrators driving them out before their work could be done.

The British did not fulfill their task as outlined in the mandate. You seem to forget that it was the "Palestinians" who first attacked the British. You propably never read the British reports from Palestine.

It might pay you to remember that deliberations of the league of nations carry no more weight than those of the UN that Israel so willingly ignores and has done for over 60 years.

It might pay to remember that all of the territories subject to League of Nations mandates were previously controlled by states defeated in World War I. The defeat of the Ottoman Empire did not free some countries but territories that had to be managed by mandates. The local citizens had no form of government nor representatives.

It was determined by the Brits that there were no "waste lands" etc and that Palestine was fully populated taking into account future population growth. This had already been noted by earlier Zionist visitors and reported to their leadership.
As for Israel's compliance:

Don't even start going on about people not honouring sacred trusts etc. The Zionists have never honoured any of their obligations to anyone but themselves. Israel's credibility, like your own is completely non existent.​

The British action was a sophism because there was no restriction on non Jewish immigrants.
The Peel Commission reported in 1937 that the shortfall of land is, we consider, due less to the amount of land acquired by Jews than to the increase in the Arab population.
As for Israel's compliance, they did. Everything would have been the same if the Arabs had not attacked a souvereign state more than once.

I'm not going to argue with you, as everything you mention has been covered several times already and being that Israel has the worlds record for condemnatory resolutions against it nothing you can say will hide the "Oh so obvious truth". More than China, and such sh!tholes as Somalia and Zimbabwe.

It's time that you back up your words with facts, because all I have seen from you is opinions, lies and distorted truths.​

 

[senojekips]

Again you are not telling everything. May I remind you that the UN Security Counsel rejected draft S/1997/1991 and draft S/1997/2412 which sought to call Israeli settlements as illegal and that the ICJ did not condemn Israel but only gave advisory.

Also, the UN Charter does not grant the General Assembly or the ICJ the authority to assign or affect ‘ownership’ of the Territories.

Another thing : occupied land lays beyound your borders, but the eastern border of Israel is not yet defined. The green line is not the definite border of Israel and awaits the outcome of talks. What if it is decided that the definitive border is the eastern border of the West Bank?

Resolution 181 doesn't matter. Israel became an official member state of the UN on 11-05-1949.

Only under the condition that it conformed with the restrictions laid down, which it never has?? None of which has the slightest bearing on the fact that Israel was occupied illegally during a power vacuum, and in fact is actually no more than occupied territory as defined in the Israel Law Resource Center's findings.

Nor does it excuse the war crimes and other Human Rights atrocities committed by Israel in their illegal aggression to steal ever more land.

Perhaps Israel's borders remain undefined because it is not even a legal entity?

Once again why are you repeating all of this rubbish again, it has all been said before. If you think that memories are so short that you'll get a different answer you're sadly mistaken.

Your talking about Palestine! They shoot innocent Israeli (and other) civilians, they support etnic cleansing (as stated in their covenant to expell all the Jews) and they act as Nazis, no freedom of speech, Jews assaulted, history and geographic textbooks distorted.

All previously answered as is all your repetitions below.

There are no "innocent" Israeli civilians in Palestine, the Palestinians are legally able and expected to resist the theft of their land, just as the French resistance tried to expel the Nazis in their land. Remember we went through all of this before?

So, this means that Israel is the homeland for almost all Israelis because there are born there. Many descendants from Palestinian refugees live in Syria, Lebanon and Jordan, so that means it is their homeland?

I am a Belgian citizen living in Spain.

Your homeland is Belgium. NO it is not their homeland because they are there as illegal immigrants, their parents etc, are only illegal immigrants. There homeland is the last place their parents lived legally in Europe or wherever.

 

[VDKMS]

Only under the condition that it conformed with the restrictions laid down, which it never has?? None of which has the slightest bearing on the fact that Israel was occupied illegally during a power vacuum, and in fact is actually no more than occupied territory as defined in the Israel Law Resource Center's findings.

Nor does it excuse the war crimes and other Human Rights atrocities committed by Israel in their illegal aggression to steal ever more land.

Perhaps Israel's borders remain undefined because it is not even a legal entity?

Once again why are you repeating all of this rubbish again, it has all been said before. If you think that memories are so short that you'll get a different answer you're sadly mistaken.

All previously answered as is all your repetitions below.

There are no "innocent" Israeli civilians in Palestine, the Palestinians are legally able and expected to resist the theft of their land. Remember we went through all of this before?

It is not because we went through all this before that you are right. Your Israel Law Resource Center claims that it has proof of Israeli violations according to law but states that here statements are not allowed to be used as .... legal evidence.

FACT is that the Palestinians are able to administer their own people for the first time EVER thanks to Israel. The ottomans didn't do it, the Jordanians didn't do it, the Egyptians didn't do it, in fact no one did, except Israel. You better tank the Jews for giving the Palestinians a chance to build their own country because without them they propably ended up as Arabian Romas.

 

[senojekips]

The Palestinians only administer their people, just as the Jewish Councils administered their people in the Ghettos, another totally meaningless Zionazi "factoid". The fact is that Israel is at best regarded by the International community as legally questionable and at worst as an illegally occupied area, the occupiers of which form a pariah state despised and distrusted in all their dealings, their word like that of it's supporters, not being worth the paper it's written on.

You can present your "facts" in pastel colours all dipped in candy coating and rolled in sugar but the fact remains that like the nazis who re wrote their own laws to suit their purposes, Israel is still the worlds worst rogue state regarding Human Rights abuses and outright lies, we needn't even bother about ethic cleansing etc., as in Nazi Germany where persecution of the Jews was 100% legal.

Don't even bother telling us about "legal" anything, to do with this matter, as Israel has been shown to have never abided by any National or International Law, Convention or Ruling of any body other than where it suits their purpose, hence over 200 condemnatory UN resolutions against them.

Nothing you can say or do excuses the Israeli's Nazi like behaviour and that of the US who backs them. To be fair, the US is very slowly realising the error of it's past ways in this regard and more and more we are seeing them falling out of love. No doubt there will come a day when a combination of International moral outrage and common sense on the part of the US will see Israel cut loose.

 

[D.J]

Political rights in Palestine were granted to Jews only
The “Mandate for Palestine” clearly differentiates between political rights – referring to Jewish self-determination as an emerging polity – and civil and religious rights, referring to guarantees of equal personal freedoms to non-Jewish residents as individuals and within select communities. Not once are Arabs as a people mentioned in the “Mandate for Palestine.” At no point in the entire document is there any granting of political rights to non-Jewish entities (i.e., Arabs). Article 2 of the “Mandate for Palestine” explicitly states that the Mandatory should:

“... be responsible for placing the country under such political, administrative and economic conditions as will secure the establishment of the Jewish National Home, as laid down in the preamble, and the development of self-governing institutions, and also for safeguarding the civil and religious rights of all the inhabitants of Palestine, irrespective of race and religion.”

Political rights to self-determination as a polity for Arabs were guaranteed by the League of Nations in four other mandates – in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, and later Trans-Jordan (today Jordan). International law expert Professor Eugene V. Rostow, examining the claim for Arab Palestinian self-determination on the basis of law, concluded:

“… the mandate implicitly denies Arab claims to national political rights in the area in favor of the Jews; the mandated territory was in effect reserved to the Jewish people for their self-determination and political development, in acknowledgment of the historic connection of the Jewish people to the land. Lord Curzon, who was then the British Foreign Minister, made this reading of the mandate explicit. There remains simply the theory that the Arab inhabitants of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip have an inherent ‘natural law’ claim to the area. Neither customary international law nor the United Nations Charter acknowledges that every group of people claiming to be a nation has the right to a state of its own.”

In the first Report of the High Commissioner on the Administration of Palestine (1920-1925) presented to the British Secretary of State for the Colonies, published in April 1925, the most senior official of the Mandate, the High Commissioner for Palestine, underscored how international guarantees for the existence of a Jewish National Home in Palestine were achieved:

“The (Balfour) Declaration was endorsed at the time by several of the Allied Governments; it was reaffirmed by the Conference of the Principal Allied Powers at San Remo in 1920; it was subsequently endorsed by unanimous resolutions of both Houses of the Congress of the United States; it was embodied in the Mandate for Palestine approved by the League of Nations in 1922; it was declared, in a formal statement of policy issued by the Colonial Secretary in the same year, ‘not to be susceptible of change.’

Far from the whim of this or that politician or party, eleven successive British governments, Labor and Conservative, from David Lloyd George (1916-1922) through Clement Attlee (1945-1952) viewed themselves as duty-bound to fulfill the “Mandate for Palestine” placed in the hands of Great Britain by the League of Nations.

In 1919, in the wake of World War I, England and France as Mandatory (e.g., official administrators and mentors) carved up the former Ottoman Empire, which had collapsed a year earlier, into geographic spheres of influence. This divided the Mideast into new political entities with new names and frontiers. Territory was divided along map meridians without regard for traditional frontiers (i.e., geographic logic and sustainability) or the ethnic composition of indigenous populations.

The prevailing rationale behind these artificially created states was how they served the imperial and commercial needs of their colonial masters. Iraq and Jordan, for instance, were created as emirates to reward the noble Hashemite family from Saudi Arabia for its loyalty to the British against the Ottoman Turks during World War I, under the leadership of Lawrence of Arabia. Iraq was given to Faisal bin Hussein, son of the sheriff of Mecca, in 1918. To reward his younger brother Abdullah with an emirate, Britain cut away 77 percent of its mandate over Palestine earmarked for the Jews and gave it to Abdullah in 1922, creating the new country of Trans-Jordan or Jordan, as it was later named.

The Arabs’ hatred of the Jewish State has never been strong enough to prevent the bloody rivalries that repeatedly rock the Middle East. These conflicts were evident in the civil wars in Yemen and Lebanon, as well as in the war between Iraq and Iran, in the gassing of countless Kurds in Iraq, and in the killing of Iraqis by Iraqis. The manner in which European colonial powers carved out political entities with little regard to their ethnic composition not only led to this inter-ethnic violence, but it also encouraged dictatorial rule as the only force capable of holding such entities together.

The exception was Palestine, or Eretz-Israel – the territory between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea, where:

“The Mandatory shall be responsible for placing the country (Palestine) under such political, administrative and economic conditions as will secure the establishment of the Jewish National Home, as laid down in the preamble, and the development of self-governing institutions, and also for safeguarding the civil and religious rights of all the inhabitants of Palestine, irrespective of race and religion.”


I have no objections that people are critically or is against state of Israel
Hell, I do not agree with everything my government stands for or does.
But make sure you have the historical facts in order before you set out on a crusade.