Beyond the Cusp

May 30, 2017

Jews Who Are Counter-Productive on Israel

 

The extreme leftist Jews love to protest their self-proclaimed Israeli occupation of Judea and Samaria. You talk to any of them and they will proudly claim that Israel has no desire to pursue peace. They will tell you all about how Israel is illegally occupying Judea and Samaria under International Law. They will go on about how the area of Judea and Samaria are the Palestinians homeland and that Israel must return the lands immediately and stop stalling. They will claim that it is Netanyahu who refuses to meet with Mahmoud Abbas despite any and all evidence to the contrary. And their favorite pastime is protesting Israel loudly and proudly claiming that their Jewishness safeguards them from any charges of anti-Semitism. With their sanctimoniousness, it is difficult to have to deflate their confidence in the complete faultlessness of their arguments. The one thing that is even better is most of the claims in the rest of this article could mostly be applied to virtually all the students protesting Israel with the exception of those instigators and inciters used by NGO’s to lead so many students to protest Israel using pseudo-information that they know are pure propaganda mixed with unadulterated lies with an occasional statistic or fact mixed in for the sake of making everything else credible.

 

One of their points is that Israel took the land in the 1967 war. This they actually have correct. They claim they stole it from the Palestinians who were not even combatants in the war. This is tricky because if there were actually any people by the name of Palestinians at that time, they were not combatants. The problem is there were no Palestinians and the closest thing was the PLO which had no claims to Judea and Samaria but did claim all of Israel within the Green Line and was sworn to defeat the Jews driving them into the Sea to drown or killing them where they stood. The area of Judea and Samaria at the time between 1948 and the Six Day War was occupied; let us get this straight, that is occupied illegally, by Jordan. Jordan took control of this land during the War to Annihilate the Jews fought by over a half dozen Arab Armies against Israel starting on the morning of her birth. Jordan held half of Jerusalem and the areas of Judea and Samaria which was part of the guaranteed areas west of the Jordan River which were to be the State of Israel after an agreement reached with the British upon allowing the formation of the Arab State of Jordan. Jordan illegally annexed the land and their action was recognized by only two nations, Britain and Pakistan. After the attempt at destroying Israel by the judgement of the Peel Commission, Britain trying to help destroy Israel at every turn is quite believable (see map below). Fortunately, the Peel Commission was rejected, as was the annexation by Jordan. Even the Arab and Muslim world outside of Pakistan rejected their annexation. Also, in the War to Annihilate Israel which raged on and off through 1948-9, Egypt gained control over Gaza though they never attempted to annex the land. Jordan and Egypt both threw all the Jews from their homes and lands and Jordan went further and gifted land to many Jordanians of presumed merit though most never utilized these lands. This was a means of removing all Jewish claims to the lands. The Jordanians also illegally forced numerous Jordanian citizens to relocate onto the lands they illegally held against International Law and gave Jordanian citizenship to all Arabs living in the area. These are truths that these protesters ignore likely because they were never educated in history and were never curious enough to seek the truth themselves.

 

Peel Commission Truncated Jewish State of Israel and Expanded Transjordan

Peel Commission Truncated Jewish State of Israel and Expanded Transjordan

 

These wonderful and wide-eyed leftists right out or still incubated in college or university take on complete faith their professors tales of the crimes committed by Israeli Defense Force (IDF) soldiers which are just as big of lies as was Mahmoud Abbas trying to pass the Palestinian incitement of which he personally has taken the lead as educating their children in peace to President Trump, a lie which has been revealed using Abbas and his own words. What their professors never taught their young charges was Jewish history and the Twelve Tribes of Israel and that Israel held both sides of the Jordan River and for her northern border she had the Litani River which is inside Lebanon today and holds the Hezballah terrorist army between the Litany River and the Blue Line, the Israeli northern border with Lebanon (see map below). The Tribes of Israel included the best snow skiing in the Middle East on Mount Hermon and the medicinal waters of the Dead Sea. The Golan Heights and the Kinneret were all within her borders. What do these snowflakes from University know of this history? Probably little or nothing.

 

Eretz Yisroel from back in the time immediately after Exodus and before the additional conquest by King David and King Solomon with the original division of the lands between the Tribes covering both sides of the Jordan River. The Israelis and Jews in general could attempt to demand that Eretz Yisroel, the Land of Israel be made whole as was First Apportioned by Hashem.

 

Israel is not reluctant to make peace. Israel offered to give Judea and Samaria back to their illegal occupiers, Jordan, when the two nations reached their peace just as she had offered to return Gaza to Egypt and both refused, as there was an Arab plan to hatch. That plan was to invent a new Arab people called the Palestinians who were going to claim that they had a history in the lands. Inspect their claims and then read the Jewish history and you do not have to take modern Israelis view, read the Old Testament, the Torah (Five Books of Moses) as well as the rest of the Bible which includes Kings and Prophets and Judges. Read the entirety of the Jewish history written in the time in which it was made by those who lived and saw it in real time. The Israelite, the Jews, beginning in these lands came when Joshua crossed the Jordan and sacked Jericho, defeated five armies at Ai and then conquered the south and began the conquest of the north which had to be left for those who followed to complete, but the promise was kept and Hashem laid the land open before the Jewish People and they swelled within. Saul was anointed King and then David ruled and then Solomon who built the First Temple and the lands flourished. But it all started when they crossed the Jordan River and Joshua led the Army into the lands and began the defeat of the Canaanites, not the Arabs by any name and especially not any Palestinian Arabs who Abbas or another official once claimed lived in the lands nine thousand years ago. Well, then the Canaanites must have driven them out as they were not present for Joshua to conquer when he entered the lands just over three-thousand-five-hundred years ago, that is around 1489 BCE, in case you were wondering. (His route to the conquest of the holy Lands and the start of the nation in the Promised Lands can be seen in the map below.) The history is quite remarkable and probably a far easier and more interesting read than your chemistry books and mathematics books, at least as I remember them from my days back in the stone age.

 

Cities Conquered by Joshua as Recounted in Kings In the Hebrew Bible the Old Testament

Cities Conquered by Joshua as Recounted in Kings
In the Hebrew Bible the Old Testament

 

The realty is quite a bit different, as the area known as Judea and Samaria belonged to Israel under International Law and was illegally occupied by Jordan from 1948 up until the Six Day War; Israel did not conquer the area as Israel liberated lands that belong to Israel from Jordanian occupation. The Arabs residing in the area were holding Jordanian passports and identifications and were citizens of Jordan which meant that by International Law Israel could have made them relocate back into their country which had forced many to move into these lands; they legally could, and maybe should, have sent them back into Jordan. Having sent them all into Jordan immediately and reclaiming what was legally Israel would have saved Israel all the headaches they have faced ever since. The reason that Israel did not relocate the Arabs was simple; Israel is not a normal nation but a nation of people who are supposed to lead by showing the world a better face for humanity, a better way of treating one another, simply to be a light unto the nations. Unfortunately, Israel is located in an area where civility is seen as weakness and mercy as a form of surrender. Israel’s enemies know that the Jews are not a cruel people and use this against Israel. The professors in the universities know the youngsters in their charge are neophytes as far as historical knowledge and that their words are unquestioned by their students and thus they use them as their personal weapon against what they believe is the greatest evil in the world today, their own nation. As leftists, they cannot help but find that religious people are inherently evil and unthinking and all the things they despise most. This is why they tell lies about Israel and the Jewish People, their own people. Their little charges will grow as they enter the world and meet people with different perspectives and more knowledge which was not provided back in all their years of schooling, which is why it is known as the College of Hard Knocks in which I am working on my doctorate and that takes a lifetime. Learn whose land it was under International Law before you decide that someone is breaking International Law because when it comes to Israel, the world is attempting to coop and break International Law day in and day out, and they are doing so against their favorite people to blame for all their own ills, the Jewish People. Again, read history throughout the ages and remember the admonition we received from the All Knowing, in every generation there will be one to rise up against you. The one was not a person as much as an enemy, and this time the one is everyone and they have used you. Learn history, learn International Law, learn from the sages through the ages, and learn about the Jewish People and when you have learned a lifetime of learning, then we can talk. Learn, most important of all, on your own and trust very few, just the few who have proven that they will not lie to you and are not going to candy coat the truth even if that truth is difficult to swallow and goes against everything you think you know. First, test what everyone says by seeking out those who hold the opposite opinion and then check each one’s sources. The first we would recommend is the Bible as it holds a few thousand years of knowledge in a single book with some tremendous stories which will amaze you.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

May 1, 2017

Barghouti Palestinian Hunger Strike and International Law

 

Most people have absolutely no idea what the International Law is concerning the treatment of prisoners who choose to stage a hunger strike. Most probably believe that it is the nation where the prisoners have declared a hunger strike responsibility to do everything possible to remedy the situation favorably. This would include caving to the demands of the prisoners if that is what was required. Obviously, these people have not figured this thing out and given it the depth of thought required. If caving to the demands was a required response, and if that is what was necessary to end a prisoner hunger strike, then there would be no prisoners anywhere as all any prisoner would need to do to be released is go on a hunger strike demanding their release and then wait for a couple of weeks and have some really intense hunger pangs. Then as their health became affected, they would be released in order to preserve their health, or at least their lives. Actually, nothing could be further from the truth. The truth is if the prisoner has been determined to be of sound mind when making the decision, then any consequence of their hunger strike, including death, is on the prisoner and not the holding authority. The International Law does not even permit forced-feeding to keep prisoners alive; it actually forbids such considering forced-feeding as a form of torture which can be the basis of bringing charges against the offending government and nation. So, what exactly is the wording of the law? That can be found in the declaration of Tokyo: Declaration #6; which can be read below.


Declaration of Tokyo

International Law Concerning Prisoner Hunger Strikes

Where a prisoner refuses nourishment and is considered by the physician as capable of forming an unimpaired and rational judgment concerning the consequences of such a voluntary refusal of nourishment, he or she shall not be fed artificially. The decision as to the capacity of the prisoner to form such a judgment should be confirmed by at least one other independent physician. The consequences of the refusal of nourishment shall be explained by the physician to the prisoner.

 

This Tokyo Declaration means that if the initial physician had determined that the prisoner or prisoners who decide on a hunger strike did so while of sound mind and while not under any coercion, then a second and independent physician is required to also explain the consequences of their actions at each stage of the strike and as long as the prisoner continues demanding they continue their hunger strike, then they must be permitted to continue. Even should their action result in their deaths, they must be allowed to continue their hunger strike. There is an exception which would permit their being force-fed and that is that should they become unconscious, then they can be determined to no longer be of sound mind and thus unable to rationally insist on continuing their hunger strike and can be fed by whatever means are necessitated. Waiting for prisoners to fall unconscious before feeding them is extremely risky, as once they have lost consciousness they would be so close to death that bringing them back from the edge would be a delicate situation. The percentages for saving their lives would have fallen well below optimum and may have fallen to a point where the chances would be negligible.

 

The difficulty Israel faces is the same ideal which the Arabs throw in our faces at every opportunity with their chant of, “We love death as much as you love life and that is why we will defeat you.” To be honest, this argument has never quite made sense to us and in my case, I remember a quote attributed to General George Patton in the movie “Patton” and attributed to the General in some references where he was reputed to have said, “No bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making some other poor dumb bastard die for his country.” Apparently, the Arabs have decided to make that easier for Israel if their threat is to be taken literally. The truth is the Arab leadership loves life just as much as any Israeli, what they do not have much regard for are the lives of those they command. Arab commanders send others to die while Israeli officers are at the tip of the spear where their command to move forward is always, “Follow me,” as they lead out. The other side of the Israeli love of life is that we also value Arab lives even to include the hunger-striking prisoners. Israel was threatened of being brought before the International Criminal Court (ICC) or the International Court of Justice (ICJ) for War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity for torturing prisoners. Most people in the Western World have heard the claims that Israel tortures Arab prisoners but they have no idea what criminal definition of torture Israel is guilty of committing. Under the Declaration of Tokyo, forced-feeding of a prisoner, even to save their lives, is defined as torture. The life of the prisoner is presumably of no concern for the holding governance; it is on the prisoner if they lose their life due to a hunger strike. Under International Law, the death of a hunger-striking prisoner is considered a suicide and not the concern of the holding government. Israel cannot accept such a trivial treatment of a human life, even the life of a hunger-striking prisoner.

 

Marwan Barghouti, arch terrorist serving five life terms for only five of the dozens of Israelis murdered by his bombs and terror plans as well as likely hundreds injured, many horrifically suffering from crippling effects of these attacks

Marwan Barghouti, arch terrorist serving five life terms
for only five of the dozens of Israelis murdered by his
bombs and terror plans as well as likely hundreds injured,
many horrifically suffering from crippling effects of these attacks

 

The whole situation is considered a win-win by the Arab terror organizations which is why there are three or four hunger strikes called virtually every year. They realize there are only two results which can come from their hunger strike. They realize that there is little if any chance that they will be allowed to die as a result of their choices and actions. This means either they will have their demands met which usually amounts to several of the strikers being freed and other concessions. This result often comes when nations of the world demand that Israel not force-feed the prisoners and ties their demands to threats to take Israel before the ICC or the ICJ with charges of torture by force-feeding prisoners against their will. Simply put in everyday words, usually at the behest of the Arab League and numerous Arab governments, through behind the scenes communications, call for numerous European nations or the European Union to threaten Israel with charges of preserving human lives of their sworn enemies and often terrorist lives through the torture of forced-feeding them against their will. Prisoner rights groups and the family of nations pressed for and got the decision that the forced-feeding of prisoners was torture such that International Law made it punishable before the community of nations thus leaving only one means for a civilized people to save the lives of hunger striking prisoners, surrender to their demands. Before the decision that forced-feeding was torture there were two choices for governments, they could give in to the demands or they could force-feed the prisoners while it was still safe and would guarantee their survival. With the removal of feeding as a solution, there still remain two choices which save the life of the prisoner, giving in to their demands or waiting for them to pass into unconsciousness and then feeding them. The waiting for unconsciousness is a very risky means as some prisoners will die at the point of losing consciousness, others will be able to be saved and for far too many, the probabilities for survival would be very slim. None of these options are acceptable to Israel, not to her government and not to the vast majority of the people, even including the ones who might act tough and say, let them die, who if they had to make the call they would not allow them to die and would choose life.

 

The prisoners know that when they start to refuse food then either their demands will be met or Israel will face the screams across the globe from leftists and the anti-Semites that Israel is guilty of torture and is once again torturing their prisoners. The accusations continue and are louder every time there is a prisoner who is force-fed. Torture, torture they cry with the prisoner rights groups up in protest supported by numerous others from left wing groups plus there are the Soros groups who live to accuse Israel of crimes, BLM, BDS, pro-Palestinian groups, anti-Israel, anti-Zionist and all the rest of the anti-Semitic groups, European nations and their funded NGO’s, B’Tselem, the numerous peace groups and the list is nearly endless. Torture, torture ringing across the globe and the sun never sets on the various protests against Israel for saving lives. Imagine the outcry were Israel to permit just one hunger striking prisoner to die. The world screamed and demanded investigations for close to a year, some still ringing that bell, when one prisoner died from a stroke. The claims were that Israel somehow brought on his stroke, exactly how was never stated, it was just accepted that Israel not only could cause a prisoner to suffer a stroke but that Israel actually had caused the Arab prisoner to suffer a stroke. Israel faces three choices which range from bad to unthinkable and all but one will raise instant worldwide and vehemently loud demonstrations. Should Israel feed the prisoner the screams of torture rise up. Should Israel obey International Law and allow the prisoner the right to dignity and die for their cause, the screams of murderers rise up. Only if Israel surrenders to their demands will Israel not be derided before the world, the only result of giving in to their demands will be an immediate new strike demanding even deeper concessions and another after that and another and another on and on. Where would that end? The end result would be Israel having to return to choosing feeding the prisoners and facing torture charges or not feed them and allow International Law to work to its final end result and the prisoners start to die and facing murder charges. Israel is in a no win situation and the Arab terrorists understand this so they hold hunger strikes and wait to scream that Israel is a monster and tortures prisoners or murders prisoners. Israel will choose accusations of torture by forced-feeding the hunger strikers. Sometimes doing the right thing and deciding on the side of life is difficult because we live in a strange and often cruel world but Israel will always choose life. This does not mean Israel will capitulate to demands but it does mean that Israel will risk the accusations of torture if that is what the world defines preserving human lives when that choice presents itself. Fortunately, most Israeli physicians also side with life and will claim that any prisoner pressing a hunger strike to the point where it will likely cause permanent damage is a decision which is proof of a lack of sanity and thus permits forced-feeding. The world does not agree, they want Israel to permit the hunger-striking prisoners to die as demanded by International Law such that they can then instead of having to settle for claiming that the Israeli forced-feeding is torture to Israel is murdering prisoners. Where is sanity, we ask you, where is sanity?

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

February 21, 2017

The Sliding Scale of International Law

 

What is International Law? Well, that all depends on any number of varying particulars. The Geneva Conventions are considered by the average person as being universally applied International Law. That is not true. The Geneva Conventions only apply to the member nations. Any nation which has not signed onto the Geneva Conventions does not need abide by them. The Geneva Conventions are more of a gentleman’s agreement where thugs do not abide by them. We could call them the Marquis of Queensberry Rules for warfare. They apply to the nations who have agreed so as long as you are fighting another signatory it is as if you were fighting in the ring with rounds and a referee enforcing the rules. But if you are fighting a nation which has not signed the rules you are in an alley having a street fight where there are no rules. The problem is the nations who have signed the Geneva Conventions are required to fight by those rules no matter who the enemies are and whether they are signatories or not so the signatories fighting a war against another nation who is not a signatory is hamstrung while the other side can act however they please. This was evidenced in World War II as none of the Axis Powers (Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy and Imperialist Japan) were signatories and thus could treat prisoners of war as they desired including torture, summary executions, taking particular prisoners and treating them differently as the Nazis did with Polish and Russian prisoners and often with any British or American prisoners found to be Jews or considered troublesome such as those who had a habit of escaping and being recaptured. The movie The Great Escape was based on real events and mass escape during World War II where a large number of the men who were recaptured were simply machine gunned down in cold blood. The Japanese were equally brutal as the movie Bridge Over the River Kwai which was more loosely based on actual events and what was done to Alec Guinness’s character was just a simplified version of how the Japanese tortured prisoners but they were far more sadistic than any film could depict including beheadings and shooting squads as well as simple starvation and confinement in a metal box in the heat of the equatorial jungle. The United States and Britain were both signatories to the Geneva Conventions and as such had a code to follow in their treatment of prisoners. Many Japanese who knew how their side treated prisoners were told the Americans and British would be just as brutal which was part of why they refused to be taken and those who did fall prisoner were shocked when they were fed well and not subjected to torture. What are interesting are the claims by the Palestinians that they have rights under the Geneva Conventions as they are neither a nation nor a signatory thus the Geneva Conventions have absolutely no application nor grant them any rights whatsoever. That is just one modern example of attempting to use International Law for benefit under false pretenses.

 

Probably one of the most basic and often overlooked forms of International Law are treaties. Any treaties signed by two or more nations have the full weight of International Law. The missile and nuclear warhead treaties such as Salt and the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty are forms of International Law and are enforceable with consequences for any violations, complete with rules for enforcement and other ramifications and schedules for execution. The treaties which ended the two great world wars are still applicable today though some of the treaties from World War II superseded those from World War I such as the border definitions for Germany and France and Germany and Poland. The treaties at the end of World War I has some of the deepest ramification of any set of treaties in history as it redefined the entirety of the Balkans and eastern Europe with the breakup of the Austria-Hungarian Empire and the delineating the borders of nations carved from all of the lands from the Ottoman Empire and also lands from the retreat of the Caliphate with the exception of the lands reclaimed by Spain, Portugal and, in a sense, France. The Allied Powers (France, Britain, Italy, Russia, Japan, Poland and the United States) met in a series of Conferences, Treaties and Mandates to setup new nations across the Middle East and North Africa (MENA). Many of these nations were setup with little consideration for stability, or directly to cause instability. This was called the Sykes-Picot Agreement after the two men, one the Foreign Secretary of Britain the other the Foreign Secretary of France. Another agreement came from the San Remo Conference which formalized the Balfour Declaration and set up the Mandate System and was further included in the Treaty of Sèvres as we have discussed numerous times here at BTC.

 

sykes-picot-map nation order

 

The United Nations through the Security Council can also make enforceable International Law through what are called Chapter Seven Resolutions. The serious nature of the consequences of such resolutions is partially why the five permanent members (Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States) have veto power as these would be the primary nations who would be required to enforce such a resolution. The United Nations Security Council also has Chapter Six Resolutions which carry slightly greater weight as any resolution out of the General Assembly but both are simply advisories. The major difference between these types of resolutions is if any single party to a General Assembly Resolution refuses to agree then all parties are released from the resolution and things continue as if that resolution had never been issued. These are different from resolutions which condemn a single nation which are largely statements of discontent or condemnation which in the General Assembly often are brought against Israel more than any other nation simply because the Arab and Muslim nations with their allied nations from the developing world, most belong to the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) will pass any resolution brought before the General Assembly which targets Israel and similarly against the United States, an even somewhat rarer than those against Israel as too many nations receive largess from the United States and are intelligent enough not to push their luck while attacking Israel carries less risk.

 

That brings us back to the varying sliding scale of International Law and its application. When one looks into International Law and its applications in the past century there becomes one very clear problem, why is a nation the size of Israel been targeted with so many denunciations of being across the boundaries of International Law? Israel has been accused of genocide, collective punishment, targeting civilians intentionally, war crimes, crimes against humanity, occupation and just about anything you can think of, Israel has likely been accused of wrong-doing. What makes this all the more confusing is the guilt of some of the nations which have received exactly the opposite from Israel, aid in times of distress or natural catastrophe, yet virtually no censoring by the United Nations General Assembly for their transgressions. That list includes such nations as North Korea, Iran, Libya, Algeria, Cuba, China, Myanmar (Burma), Pakistan and even Syria. Then there are those nations which are seldom censored which are as expected such as Canada, Italy, Poland, and other nations which are seldom in the news. The true test of whether or not a nation actually receives sanctions, which are presumably applied worldwide, or if nations are brought before the international courts system such as the International Criminal Court or the International Court of Justice or any special courts setup to judge genocides or other special situations, as such measures are a sign that there has been a unforgivable transgression of International Law or against humanity.

 

This is where the case we are most concerned with here at BTC, in case one had not noticed, Israel becomes interesting. There have been exceedingly few cases compared to the number of accusations spewed before the world media, which is more than accommodating when it comes to denouncing Israel, that have been brought before the world courts. The one case we can think of off the top was about the so-called Apartheid Wall, the anti-terror wall which Israel put in place to end the Second Intifada and especially to end the waves of suicide bombings. Before the wall, which is largely a barrier made up of fences and only used walls where sniper fire was a potential problem such as in cities, there were multiple suicide bombings weekly, or so it seemed much of the time, and after the construction of the wall that number dropped to zero. Terrorism also dropped off and the barrier brought an end to the Second Intifada in conjunction with an IDF operation in Judea and Samaria to clear out much of the terrorist infrastructure and restore an IDF presence which served to provide intelligence and as a preventive influence against further terror. The General Assembly voted at the urging of the Palestinian Authority observer to request from the International Court of Justice (ICJ) a ruling on the legality of the wall with the hope of gaining a ruling which would lead to its dismantling such that the terrorist operations would not be hindered by the barrier. The barrier was cleared but that was just the initial good news for Israel. In addition to being cleared of any wrongdoing, there was an advisory opinion issued as a cautionary warning by Egyptian Judge, Justice El Araby, from the ICJ and who sat in judgement as part of the panel which heard the case from the United Nations General Assembly in 2003 on the legality of the security barrier erected by Israel. The Honorable Justice El Araby warned the UNGA and others that filing further ran some risks, as he stated,

 

“The international legal status of the Palestinian Territory (paras. 70-71 of the Advisory Opinion), in my view, merits more comprehensive treatment. A historical survey is relevant to the question posed by the General Assembly, for it serves as the background to understanding the legal status of the Palestinian Territory on the one hand and underlines the special and continuing responsibility of the General Assembly on the other. This may appear as academic, without relevance to the present events. The present is however determined by the accumulation of past events and no reasonable and fair concern for the future can possibly disregard a firm grasp of past events. In particular, when on more than one occasion, the rule of law was consistently side-stepped. The point of departure, or one can say in legal jargon, the critical date, is the League of Nations Mandate which was entrusted to Great Britain.”

 

This has been one of the reasons that the Palestinian Authority, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, the Arab World, Iran, the Muslim Brotherhood and others such as the European Union and many individual European and other nations or even individuals have never challenged the claim to all the lands west of the Jordan River as being meant for anything other than Israel, the Homelands for the Jewish People, they know what the actual treaties, conferences and agreements all state clearly, the land belongs to Israel and by agreement and International Law only the Jewish People have full political rights while the others who reside in the area must be guaranteed civil rights, property rights, equality under the law, religious rights but not political rights. The agreements simply state that only the Jewish People and those they willingly extend such rights may exercise political rights. Everybody is to be granted civil rights, religious rights, property rights, and equal treatment under the law. That is the International Law as delineated by numerous treaties, conferences, agreements and is exactly what Justice El Araby, the Egyptian Judge on the ICJ, was warning the Palestinian Arabs and the Arab World about, Israel holds all the cards and other than receiving written and signed treaty with Israel, there is no legal means that the Arabs can claim even a single inch of the lands west of the Jordan River. Should they challenge such claiming anything under International Law as backing their claims, including, may we add, United Nations Security Council Chapter Sic Resolution 2334 which President Obama presented as his parting gift to the Palestinian Arabs and Mahmoud Abbas along with Iran all hoping that would cripple Israel, they will lose because Israel has every right to the lands and the best the Arabs can hope to gain, something they already have, is to live in peace under Israeli rule.

 

They would be granted all rights with one glaring exception, the right to political power or even to vote as all political power was vested for the Jews and only the Jews and those they decide to grant such rights. Israel, counter to the claims of too many ignorant and deceiving people, has granted full political rights to those Arabs who remained within the areas she was capable of holding after the Arab assault of intended genocide against the Jews in 1948-9 when half a dozen Arab armies and numerous militias and other units attacked Israel the morning of her inception. All the remaining Arabs, the Muslims, the Christians, the Baha’I, the Buddhists, everybody residing within Israel legally once the fighting ended were granted full citizenship and full civil, religious, legal, and political rights. Jordan extended similar to the Arabs in Judea and Samaria which they renamed West Bank as Judea and Samaria sounded too Jewish, and Egypt controlled Gaza but never annexed it or gave the residents there any rights leaving them under military occupation. There was no outcry for Palestinian rights or for the founding of any Arab Palestine while Egypt and Jordan held the lands, only after the Six Day War in June of 1967 and Israel liberating these lands did the world become obsessed. After the Six Day War Jordan reneged on her offer of citizenship and even stripped citizenship from the Jordanians which had been forced or given land and moved into Judea and Samaria making them people without a country and this was the birth of the Palestinian demands for their own nation. The claim that Israel had invaded and stolen Arab Palestinian lands was born three years earlier in 1964 with Yasser Arafat and the Palestinian Liberation Organization except it was not Judea and Samaria that Israel had stolen but Israel herself was the lands claimed by Arafat. The PLO and their claims to Palestine was initially a direct challenge to Israel claiming that Israel was an illegitimate entity born atop of sacred Arab lands and that the Jews were to be exterminated if they refused to leave. After the Six Day War a readjustment was made and they now claimed all the lands west of the Jordan River, the twenty-two percent of the British Mandate which was not Jordan, this is what they claim must be given to them, not just Judea and Samaria and make no mistake. Their problem is simply, International Law actually backs the Jewish claim, it, for once, backs Israel. For once the rules actually are not stacked against Israel, though all the denunciations and referendums and resolutions and they amount to little more than noise because in the end there is only the written agreements of the nations of the world, and those all support Israel as the home for the Jewish People, just as an Egyptian Judge sitting on one of the highest courts in the world has admonished the Arabs to take note. Sometimes the noise is but an attempt to hide the truth, sometimes the truth wins out in the end. International Law, remarkable, isn’t it?

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

« Previous PageNext Page »

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.