No Jew has the right to yield the rights of the
Jewish People in Israel
David Ben Gurion
(David Ben-Gurion was the first Prime Minister of Israel and widely hailed as the State's main founder).
“No Jew is entitled to give up the right of establishing [i.e. settling] the Jewish Nation in all of theLand of
Israel
BEN-GURION’S DECLARATION ON THE EXCLUSIVE AND
INALIENABLE JEWISH RIGHT TO THE WHOLE OF
THE LAND OF ISRAEL:
at the Basle Session of the 20th Zionist Congress atZurich
"No country in the world exists today by virtue of its 'right'.
All countries exist today by virtue of their ability to defend themselves against those who seek their destruction."
“Man can live about forty days without food, about three days without water, about eight minutes without air, but only for one second without hope”
“The Jews are a peculiar people: Things permitted to other nations are forbidden to the Jews.
Other nations drive out thousands, even millions of people, and there is no refugee problem.Russia Poland Czechoslovakia Turkey Algeria Indonesia
But in the case ofIsrael Israel Israel
Everyone expects the Jews to be the only real most honorable in this world.”
David Ben Gurion
(David Ben-Gurion was the first Prime Minister of Israel and widely hailed as the State's main founder).
“No Jew is entitled to give up the right of establishing [i.e. settling] the Jewish Nation in all of the
BEN-GURION’S DECLARATION ON THE EXCLUSIVE AND
INALIENABLE JEWISH RIGHT TO THE WHOLE OF
THE LAND OF ISRAEL:
at the Basle Session of the 20th Zionist Congress at
"No country in the world exists today by virtue of its 'right'.
All countries exist today by virtue of their ability to defend themselves against those who seek their destruction."
“Man can live about forty days without food, about three days without water, about eight minutes without air, but only for one second without hope”
“The Jews are a peculiar people: Things permitted to other nations are forbidden to the Jews.
Other nations drive out thousands, even millions of people, and there is no refugee problem.
But in the case of
Everyone expects the Jews to be the only real most honorable in this world.”
Palestine aka Greater Israel is Jewish territory according to International law and treaties, additionally incorporating the January 3, 1919 Faisal Weitzman agreement executed by both parties in London on January 3, 1919.
ReplyDeleteThe Law of Return is for The Jews and reciprocating equity by the Arabs
The Law of Return is for The Jews, the option to return to Greater Israel and The Arab-Palestinians to leave Greater Israel and return to the Arab countries they originated from. The Arab-Palestinians should move to the Million plus Jewish homes and land confiscated by the Arab countries from the million persecuted and expelled Jewish families and the 120,440 sq. km. of Real estate property the Arabs confiscated from the million plus Jewish families and their children expelled from Arab countries. That is the only viable alternative. (Why are we ignoring the Faisal Weitzman agreement of January 3, 1919 which is the only valid agreement executed by both the Arabs and the Jews). In reviewing various legal aspects of agreements and resolutions to be applied to third parties, all resolutions by the UN which are recommendation only, must be executed and agreed to by the parties otherwise they have no validity. Therefore, any and all resolutions issued by the UN which have not been executed and agreed to by the parties have no affect and are null and void. This applies to any of the League of Nation and the UN resolutions that affect the territories and boundaries of Israel and any other resolutions that affect Israel. That leaves us back to the territory allocated by the San Remo Conference of 1920 and its confirmation by the Treaty of Sevres and Lausanne, which is all of Palestine. (By the way I have the minutes of the 1918-19 Paris Conference, The 1920 San Remo Conference and The Treaty of Sevres which was executed by all the Supreme Allied Powers).
Face it and stop hallucinating, once and for all. There will never be an Arab-Palestinian State in Greater Israel West of the Jordan River (Judea and Samaria). Jerusalem is the United Eternal Capital of the Jewish people.
Responding to arguments that million Jews expelled from Arab countries has no bearing on the Arabs who left Palestine or Arabs displaced from Jewish land and or formerly Ottoman government land has nothing to do with each other. The law of equity in not a one way street, it works both ways. The Arab nations that expelled the million Jewish families (who lived in the Arab countries for over 2500 years and owned 120,440 sq. km. of land, homes, businesses and personal assets valued in the trillions of dollars) they are the ones who asked the Arabs in Palestine to vacate their homes while they obliterate the Jews and they are the ones supporting the Arab-Palestinians in demanding law of return and compensation. Those Arab countries are financing the Arab-Palestinians in their quest to eject the Jews a second time from their own historical ancestral homeland. The best and only solution is a population transfer.
YJ Draiman
Over one million Jews and their families have been terrorized, persecuted and forced to flee from Arab countries and hundreds of Jewish communities have been ethnically cleansed throughout this century. Most of these refugees now live in Israel and their old homes are no more. The Arab countries confiscated all the Jewish personal assets, businesses, homes and over 120,400 sq. km. of Real estate property which is 6 times the size of Israel and valued in the trillions of dollars. In fact, Jews who immigrated to Israel from Arab and Muslim lands and their descendants constitute over 50% of Israel’s population.
If Israel has no right to exist, what is The U.S. of America's right to exist?
ReplyDeleteBoth countries give the same answer: refugees and settlers from around the world came to our land and built up a nation over more than a century, making major sacrifices in blood and toil to establish a new nation based on shared ideas rather than long-time indigenous residence. If anything, Israel's claim to legitimacy is MUCH stronger than the US claim for three reasons:
1) No one claims that the Brits (and others) who settled North America were coming back to an ancestral homeland.
2) No international organization ever recognized their right to that homeland, As the Faisal Weizmann Agreement of January 1919 and as the San Remo Conference of April 1920 implemented by the League of Nations did for Israel in 1923 and the United Nations did confirm the 1920 international agreement in 1947.
3) No one can possibly claim that Israeli settlement caused a demographic disaster for the native population since the Arab-PALESTINIAN population of the country is now more than 50 times greater than it was when additional Jewish return to their homeland began in earnest in the 1880's. At no time—in no decade—did Arab-Palestinian population decline in Palestine, but the Native American population in the U.S. drastically declined (mostly through disease, by the way) from the beginning of European colonization (1607) until 1900 (when Indian numbers began a dramatic rise).
Four questions:
1) If Palestine was the ancient homeland of an ancient people with their own strong sense of national identity, can anyone name, please, the most famous Arab-Palestinians produced in those centuries and millennia of history? Who was the most celebrated of all in the long line of Arab-Palestinian kings, or viceroys, or prime ministers? Which Arab-Palestinian poet or philosopher stirred the world with his words and ideas? Which great Arab-Palestinian scientist or inventor or composer or painter achieved international or even regional renown? The inability to answer that question doesn't testify to a lack of ability or brilliance: it testifies to the synthetic, phony nature of the invented "Arab-Palestinian" identity. There were no remarkable or brilliant kings of Arab-Palestine because there were no kings of Arab-Palestine at all—no Arab nation ever existed in this area, only ill-defined pieces of various Islamic, Turkic, Byzantine and Roman empires over the course of 2,000 years. The only time any national identity existed centered on this particular piece of real estate, that national identity was Jewish: that's why the only famous "Palestinians" who ever existed were Jews, from King David to Jesus to Moses Maimonides (died in Israel in 1215) to David Ben Gurion. No "Palestinian" Arab nationalism ever existed, as distinct from Pan-Arabism, until Yasser Arafat (born in Egypt, raised in Kuwait) invented it as a pure fabrication after the June war of 1967.
2) If Arab-Palestinians merely yearn to establish their own homeland on the West Bank, Gaza and in East Jerusalem, why did they make no effort to do so—and no progress in doing so—during the twenty years when all those territories were in unquestioned Arab control (1947-1967) without a single Jewish "settler" or even resident allowed to live there? The ancient Jewish Quarter of the old city of Jerusalem, inhabited by a religious Jewish community without interruption for more than 3,000 years, had been liquidated of all Jews, with more than 50 major synagogues utterly destroyed—by explosions and bulldozers—after the Old City fell to Jordanian troops in 1949 and Jewish cemeteries destroyed and used for construction. Before the war of extermination launched by President Abdul Nasser of Egypt in May, 1967, there were ZERO Israeli communities anywhere in "Arab-Palestinian territory" but no moves toward statehood. Isn't this definitive proof that the whole purpose of "Arab-Palestinian nationalism" has nothing to do with building an Arab-Palestinian state (where one never, ever existed) but in destroying a Jewish state (which did exist in the region going back over 3,000 years ago for more than 1,000 years)?
ReplyDelete3) Zionism and additional Jewish return to that ancient homeland began in the 1880's. Before Hitler even came to power, a half million Jews had settled permanently in today's Israel and built whole new cities where none ever previously existed (Israel's largest city, Tel Aviv, was founded in 1909 on empty sand dunes, purchased from their absentee owners, and today the metro area is home to 4,000,000 Jews and more than 42% of Israel's population). Question: during all this energetic and fateful Jewish resettlement, when did the very first Arab-Palestinian refugees lose their homes and find themselves driven from their ancient patrimony? Answer: only AFTER 1948, and the war of destruction launched by local Arabs and, ultimately, their Egyptian, Syrian, Jordanian Lebanese and Iraqi allies in 1948-1949. The population figures are unequivocal, undeniable, compiled not by Jews and Zionists but by Ottoman Turks, Brits, and Palestinian Arabs themselves: Jewish settlement didn't drive Arab-Palestinians from the land, but rather attracted them to it in unprecedented numbers. In fact, the Arab-Palestinian population not only increased alongside the Jewish population, but increased at faster rates: between WWI and WWII (1918-1929) the Jewish population went up by 490,000 and the Palestinian Arab population rose even quicker and went up by 588,000. Arab-Palestinian life expectancy, living standards and education levels also improved spectacularly, as measured by all international and Arab organizations.
ReplyDelete4) If Israel is truly an alien presence imposed on the region by the imperialist, colonialist designs of the United States and its Western allies, due to the overwhelming power of conspiring Zionists and Jewish voters, then how many American troops have lost their lives or even risked their lives on Israel's behalf in the 65 years of the nation's history? Answer: absolutely zero. In none of Israel's wars did American military forces take an active role. In fact, in Israel's War of Independence (1948-49), while the young nation lost more than 1% of its total population on the battlefield (the equivalent of 3,100,000 Americans today), the Israel Defense Forces were crippled by an all-encompassing American arms embargo that prevented any material or military assistance to the Jewish state. Arab oil interests have always been more influential on shaping Western policy than Zionist pressure or pleas.
During all the years of Hitler's Holocaust (1939-45), and in the three years immediately following the war, the British government did NOTHING to help Jewish refugees who tried to flee to Israel and in fact blocked and banned their emigration entirely, arresting and deporting any Jews who attempted to enter the area of Mandatory Palestine (today's Israel, Arab-Palestinian controlled territories, and Jordan). As recently as 1967, when Egypt's dictator Abdul Nasser repeatedly announced his intention to "eliminate" the Jewish presence in the region and ordered the UN peace-keeping troops to get out of his way (they immediately complied), the US Secretary of State Dean Rusk announced to the world that America would remain "neutral in thought, word and deed" and would do nothing to rescue the threatened Jewish population.
Major US Foreign Aid to Israel didn't begin until after the October War of 1973, as part of an effort by the Nixon and Carter administrations to bribe the Israelis, basically, to return the Sinai Peninsula to Egypt. Part of the peace agreement brokered by Carter involved promises of aide at its current levels to both Egypt and Israel. In 1967, Israel won its war against Egypt, Syria and Jordan without any American planes in its air force; the nation relied on French "Mirages" it had purchased to confront the advanced Russian MIG’s used by the other side, the Arabs.
Finally, if pro-Israel policies are the result of Jewish influence rather than American self-interest, then why do Jewish voters remain unshakably committed to the Democratic Party which has been consistently less supportive of Israel's interests than the Republicans? The most pro-Israel political figures in American history—“Mr. Republican" Bob Taft, Barry Goldwater, Ronald Reagan, George W. Bush—NEVER attracted a majority of Jewish votes, but the most anti-Israel nominees—George McGovern and Jimmy Carter—unfailingly performed well in the Jewish community as long as they were Democrats. Since FDR, only one Democrat failed to win more than 60% of the Jewish vote: Jimmy Carter in 1980, who saw the Jewish vote split three ways (and nearly evenly) between himself, liberal independent candidate John Anderson, and Reagan. In 2012, Romney (a personal friend of Netanyahu's for 30 years) was clearly, unabashedly more pro-Israel than Obama (who had feuded publicly and bitterly with the Israeli government) but Obama still drew 70% of the Jewish vote.
ReplyDeleteAs to the belief that a more pro-Arab Palestinian policy on the part of the US would lead to reduced terrorism against American targets, consider that the worst, bloodiest terrorists outrages in US history all were launched and planned under the most pro-Arab Palestinian administration in US history. Bill Clinton not only presided over the Oslo Accords, granting recognition to the Arab-Palestinian Authority, but met more frequently with Yasser Arafat than he did with any foreign leader. Yet under Clinton, Islamist terrorists plotted the first AND second World Trade Center bombings (yes, 9/11 was entirely planned and set up during Clinton), the Embassy Bombings in East Africa, Khobar Towers, the USS Cole, and so forth. Under that pro-Palestinian US regime, and the similarly pro-Arab Palestinian Israeli regimes of "peace makers" Rabin and Peres, Israeli deaths at the hands of terrorists averaged nearly 200 per year; under the "get tough" policies of Ariel Sharon, Ehud Olmert and Netanyahu, those deaths have averaged less than 20 a year.
These are facts.
Please invite any doubters to check them out, with independent sources.
The facts—and the four questions posed above—simply do not conform to the anti-Israel narrative. How, for instance, can you describe Arab-Palestinians as a people dispossessed when their population swelled and their conditions dramatically improved simultaneous to mass Jewish immigration?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWe shall consider: ”Anyone in Israel considering the surrender of Jewish territory is treason and must be prosecuted”
ReplyDeleteClipping from Saint Petersburg Times (approximately 1946)
Washington - (UP) - Britain's treaty grafting independence to Trans-Jordan violates agreements with the United States, the United Nations and the Old League, as well as the rights of the people of Palestine, Senator Francis J. Myers, Pennsylvania democrat, charged yesterday.
Echoing the words of Senator Claude Pepper, Democrat, Florida, who flayed U.S. foreign policy, Thursday, Myers asserted that Trans-Jordan is not ready for the statehood and "illegally granted". And in offering that goal of all dependencies, he added Britain has acted "in contempt of the senate of the United States."
* * *
"WHY THIS HASTE and Stealth?" he asked in a floor speech. "The British government which has fought all attempts at freedom, all movements for independence in the Middle East, is now discovered in the gracious role of liberator.
"Are there perhaps some hidden resources, mineral wealth or oil which are involved?"
He demanded that the state department explain its failure to protest the treaty violation, and urged that the senate demand all the facts.
Pepper charged that the United States had become a guarantor of British Imperialism, and that the British-Trans-Jordan agreement was but a "subterfuge" so long as his majesty's troops are allowed to remain in that country. He also asserted that the United States and Britain were ganging up on Russia, and added:
"WHAT I DECRY is the international hypocrisy, sham and pretense. If the British people want the Russians to get their troops out of Iraq, let them get their troops out of Trans-Jordan. Let them get their troops out of Lebanon and Syria, and let them get their troops out of Palestine."
Myers picked up that tune, changing only the words. In angry mood, the dark-haired Pennsylvanian told his colleagues that:
1. The territory of Trans-Jordan is contained in the original mandate for Palestine, and under its terms, the mandate could not be unilaterally altered.
2. Under the Anglo-American Convention of 1924, Britain could not change the mandate's terms without the consent of the United States.
3. This violation of the treaty with the United States also "strikes at the charter of the United Nations adopted at San Francisco" which "specifically states that no change can be made in the status of mandated territories without the approval of the UNO's general assembly."
Myers asserted that there was no more justification for separating Trans-Jordan from Palestine then there was for "the separation of the United States into two nations: Trans-Mississippi and Cis-Mississippi."
"Aaron Burr tried to do that to our nation" he said. "He was tried for treason".
We shall consider: ”Anyone in Israel considering the surrender of Jewish territory is treason and must be prosecuted”
We shall consider: ”Anyone in Israel considering the surrender of Jewish territory is treason and must be prosecuted”
ReplyDeleteClipping from Saint Petersburg Times (approximately 1946)
Washington - (UP) - Britain's treaty grafting independence to Trans-Jordan violates agreements with the United States, the United Nations and the Old League, as well as the rights of the people of Palestine, Senator Francis J. Myers, Pennsylvania democrat, charged yesterday.
Echoing the words of Senator Claude Pepper, Democrat, Florida, who flayed U.S. foreign policy, Thursday, Myers asserted that Trans-Jordan is not ready for the statehood and "illegally granted". And in offering that goal of all dependencies, he added Britain has acted "in contempt of the senate of the United States."
* * *
"WHY THIS HASTE and Stealth?" he asked in a floor speech. "The British government which has fought all attempts at freedom, all movements for independence in the Middle East, is now discovered in the gracious role of liberator.
"Are there perhaps some hidden resources, mineral wealth or oil which are involved?"
He demanded that the state department explain its failure to protest the treaty violation, and urged that the senate demand all the facts.
Pepper charged that the United States had become a guarantor of British Imperialism, and that the British-Trans-Jordan agreement was but a "subterfuge" so long as his majesty's troops are allowed to remain in that country. He also asserted that the United States and Britain were ganging up on Russia, and added:
"WHAT I DECRY is the international hypocrisy, sham and pretense. If the British people want the Russians to get their troops out of Iraq, let them get their troops out of Trans-Jordan. Let them get their troops out of Lebanon and Syria, and let them get their troops out of Palestine."
Myers picked up that tune, changing only the words. In angry mood, the dark-haired Pennsylvanian told his colleagues that:
1. The territory of Trans-Jordan is contained in the original mandate for Palestine, and under its terms, the mandate could not be unilaterally altered.
2. Under the Anglo-American Convention of 1924, Britain could not change the mandate's terms without the consent of the United States.
3. This violation of the treaty with the United States also "strikes at the charter of the United Nations adopted at San Francisco" which "specifically states that no change can be made in the status of mandated territories without the approval of the UNO's general assembly."
Myers asserted that there was no more justification for separating Trans-Jordan from Palestine then there was for "the separation of the United States into two nations: Trans-Mississippi and Cis-Mississippi."
"Aaron Burr tried to do that to our nation" he said. "He was tried for treason".
We shall consider: ”Anyone in Israel considering the surrender of Jewish territory is treason and must be prosecuted”