How can we stop the rockets from landing on Sderot, Israel?

You're ignoring the West Bank. This is territory Israel illegally seized.

 

REF: How can we stop the rockets from landing on Sderot, Israel?
SUBTOPIC: Who is the foreign fighting whom for what?
⁜→ Imnotreallyhere, et al,

(COMMENT)

Well, that is a matter of perspective.

For eight centuries, the West Bank was under the sovereign control of the Ottoman Empire. The Allied Power established control over territory that included the West Bank. In the Treaty of Lausanne (1924) the Turkish Republic connected to:

The Allied Powers Assumed control. For more than three Millennium, the customary practice of those that, once controlled the territory today known as the West Bank, was by Force of Arms (with very minor exceptions).

In 1949, the Jordanians took control of the West Bank through military force.

In 1950, the Jordanians unified the two-banks.

In 1967, a conflict reopened between Israel and Jordan.

Jordan maintained a Sovereign claim of the West Bank, but NOT effective control. Israel occupied the Jordanian West Bank.

In 1988 Jordan cut all ties with the Sovereign holding West of the Jordan River. Leaving it to abandon and under the effective control of Israel. There was no Arab Palestinian Government waiting to take control.

In 1994, the Peace Treaty was signed between Israel and Jordan. That treaty effectively ended the portion of the conflict between Israel and Jordan. The Treaty identified every inch of the "Article 3 (and Annex) - International Boundary" between Israel and Jordan. You can see if you bother to trace it out, that the treaty includes the entirety of the West Bank to the Israeli side."

Now, I am not sure who screwed-up the Oslo Accords, but when you say that Israel occupied the West Bank Illegally, exactly when did that happen?


Most Respectfully,
R

 

This is entirely irrelevant. By legal agreement of all countries, individuals retain ownership of their property even when conquered by an invading force.

Yet, Israel bulldozes the homes of those who live in West Bank, but don't have ISRAELI building permits. Large numbers of Palestinians living in West Bank live under the MILITARY LAW of a foreign power (Israel) in which that have zero representation, and that law is enforced in part by mercenaries - leaving Palestinians NO access to law.

As a result, just look at ANY Israeli map of West Bank. They have captured huge amounts of that country by force and have worked hard to deny them any kind of representation.

The ethnic cleansing Israel is perpetrating in West Bank has NOTHING to do with security and it is a monumental human atrocity.

 

REF: How can we stop the rockets from landing on Sderot, Israel?
SUBTOPIC: Who is the foreign fighting whom for what?
⁜→ Imnotreallyhere, Willreadmore, et al,
.

(COMMENT)
.
What this article actually says is:

It is actually the Arab Palestinians that made the threat to use force against the territorial integrity and political independence of the New State of Israel. Which, by the way, is a process similar to that used in the establishment of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan. It is not like the Arab Palestinians, indeed, the whole world saw before.

(COMMENT)
.
I think you meant to say "Sovereign" control and not "Ownership." The first is our topic. Ownership is a commercial or private property term.

At no time (prior to DEC 2012) did any Arab Palestinian political entity have "sovereignty" over a square inch of territory. This tall tale that Israel took something from the West Bank Arab Palestinians is totally erroneous.

You do not have to take my word for it. Consider the words of the UN Legal Office:

​

It might you some good if you examined Memorandum "A" to this Document (A/AC.21/UK/42. 25 February 194.

3. Where the sovereignty of Palestine lies at the present time in a disputed and perhaps academic legal question about which writers have expressed a number of different conclusions. Where the sovereignty of Palestine will lie after the 15th May, 1948; is perhaps also a question on which different views will be held but so far as His Majesty’s Government are aware, it is a question which it is unnecessary to answer in connection with any practical issues.

4. After the 15th May, 1948, the United Nations Commission will be the Government of Palestine. It does not seem very material whether it is considered to be the de facto or the de jure Government. In any case, its title to be the Government of Palestine will rest on the resolution of the General Assembly.
[/quote]

Pro-Arab Palestinian and anti-Israel Activists often make the very claim, as if UN Article 2(4) was somehow violated. But if you ask them "when did the Arab Palestinian ever achieve sovereignty, you get a reply containing nothing binding.

You might also review:

(Para 3, A/PV.2268. 14 October 1974), agree to ANNEX III Protocol Concerning Civil Affairs • ARTICLE IV Special Provisions concerning Area "C" • which assigned Israel full civil and security control over Area “C". Article V. Declaration of Principles on Interim Self- Government Arrangements September 13, 1993. TRANSITIONAL PERIOD AND PERMANENT STATUS NEGOTIATIONS​

This is the part where the Arab Palestinian agreed to the terms of Area "C".

(REMEMBERING)

On 6 February 1948, a communique was forwarded to the Secretary-General by the Representative of the Arab Higher Committee (AHC). This communique stated that the AHC cannot recognize the Balfour Declaration, the Mandate of Palestine or any situation arising or derived therefrom. The AHC considers that imposing international alien immigrants on their country by force is nothing but an act of aggression and invasion, whether made by Jews themselves, through Great Britain, or by the United Nations. The Arab Higher Committee Delegation, therefore, expects that the duty of the United Nations is to remove the said aggression and stop that invasion. The creation of any Jewish state in an Arab territory is more than invasion or aggression, it is something with no precedent in history.

The Arab Palestinians rejected every invitation made to join the establishment of self-governing institutions. The Arab League was gearing up for a conflict even before the Arab Higher Committee violated Article 2(4).


Most Respectfully,
R

 

I propose to treat terror same as Obama treated Kalb Osama Ben Laden

 

Not according to Hamas leader which only yesterday called all Arabs to grab a knife and butcher Israelis.
Please check your information again.

 

So you're OK with ethnic cleansing? Or do you have a foolproof method of determining who is a terrorist and who is not? Please share your system.

It seems to me you are proposing simple and unworkable solutions to complex problems.

 

Trump called for an insurrection to seize power. That didn't work out for him. Apparently not all Americans backed him. I'd be willing to bet not all Arabs back Hamas. No one is calling for the execution of Trump or his supporters. Why do you think the final solution is appropriate here?

 

Yes. Israel is stealing the private property of Palestinians.

Yes, it is also a problem of representation in the government that rules large numbers of Palestinians - Israeli military government ruling civilians who have no representation.

The US revolution was based on lack of representation that was LESS SEVERE than what Israel imposes.

Do you believe the violence perpetrated in our own revolution was unwarranted? Do you believe we were an illegal state that should have been suppressed by military force?

Or, do you believe that representation in the government that has control of you is a serious issue?

Israel is continuing to steal property from Palestinians TODAY!!

Pro-Arab Palestinian and anti-Israel Activists often make the very claim, as if UN Article 2(4) was somehow violated. But if you ask them "when did the Arab Palestinian ever achieve sovereignty, you get a reply containing nothing binding.

You might also review:

(Para 3, A/PV.2268. 14 October 1974), agree to ANNEX III Protocol Concerning Civil Affairs • ARTICLE IV Special Provisions concerning Area "C" • which assigned Israel full civil and security control over Area “C". Article V. Declaration of Principles on Interim Self- Government Arrangements September 13, 1993. TRANSITIONAL PERIOD AND PERMANENT STATUS NEGOTIATIONS​

This is the part where the Arab Palestinian agreed to the terms of Area "C".

(REMEMBERING)

On 6 February 1948, a communique was forwarded to the Secretary-General by the Representative of the Arab Higher Committee (AHC). This communique stated that the AHC cannot recognize the Balfour Declaration, the Mandate of Palestine or any situation arising or derived therefrom. The AHC considers that imposing international alien immigrants on their country by force is nothing but an act of aggression and invasion, whether made by Jews themselves, through Great Britain, or by the United Nations. The Arab Higher Committee Delegation, therefore, expects that the duty of the United Nations is to remove the said aggression and stop that invasion. The creation of any Jewish state in an Arab territory is more than invasion or aggression, it is something with no precedent in history.

The Arab Palestinians rejected every invitation made to join the establishment of self-governing institutions. The Arab League was gearing up for a conflict even before the Arab Higher Committee violated Article 2(4).


Most Respectfully,
R[/QUOTE]
I don't respect the view that Israel can use that kind of legalese to justify theft of property and ethnic cleansing of West Bank.

The UN, which you cite, makes it clear that when land changes hands, property owners continue to be secure in their property.

At the very least, when Israel steals land, those living there become Israeli citizens, thus having repreentations.

However, it's also the case that the UN denies the right of a country to increase its size through military force.

 

That would be a crime, obviously.

However, the problem IS one of Israel having the power and the intent to continue ethnic cleansing in West Bank.

The Palestinian government has worked toward a political resolution, opposing violent solutions.

Those moves have been stifled by Israel and the United States, which continues to support ethnic cleansing of West Bank by giving military and political aid to Israel for that purpose.

It is ISRAEL and the USA that refuse to even cease the violence and appeal to a legal solution.

 

Stop trolling.
Obama treated Kalb Osama Ben Laden .. he didn't ethnic clease nobody else.

 

No.
Bedouin Arabs steal Israeli land in the Negev desert.

 

Not All, but many do !!!
Do you support Hamas leader which called all Arabs to grab a knife and butcher Israelis ?

 

That does not refute anything that has been pointed out to you - as if you didn't know that perfectly well.

Israel has stolen West Bank land all the way to the Jordan River.

And, that has included bulldozing homes, stealing water rights, destroying Palestinian agriculture, and ruling the people with MILITARY law in which West Bank Palestinians have no representation.

This IS ethnic cleansing, and it IS a humanitarian crime.

 

So how do you propose to eliminate Hamas without ethnic cleansing? Because that's what you seem to suggest. What are your criteria for 'elimination'? Will they be effective? Israel's been fighting Hamas and other groups like it for more than 50 years. If there were an easy or foolproof method they would have finished by now. So let's hear your idea, because what I'm hearing from you is that you want Israel to escalate. That doesn't seem to be working out too well.

 

So you can paint them all with the same brush?

Do you support Hamas leader which called all Arabs to grab a knife and butcher Israelis ? [/QUOTE]

I don't support terrorism. But it can't be used as a justification for Israel killing Palestinians without proof. Or are you willing to terrorize people based on their ethnicity? There's a special phrase we use for that: ethnic cleansing.

 

MYTH ALERT, MYTH ALERT, MYTH ALERT.
someone forgot that Israel won a war in 1967 against Jordan ?

 

Only Arabs ethnic cleanse Other Arabs.
Deal with it.
Shia kill Sunni, Sunni kill Shia.
Deal with it also

 

Winning wars is NOT JUSTIFICATION for changing borders.

This is a matter of international law.

Beyond that, if borders are moved such that someone's residence ends up in a different country, that individual get automatic citizenship in the new country and has full and continuing property rights.

 

REF: How can we stop the rockets from landing on Sderot, Israel?
SUBTOPIC: Borders
⁜→ Willreadmore, et al,

(COMMENT)

I think you have the wrong idea about borders.

Generally speaking, a border has two frontiers that separate two sovereign powers. The sovereign powers can come together, at any time, create a treaty (or similar arrangement) and alter the existing border to a new agreed-upon path. Such is the case with Israel. Sometimes, it is merely a matter of one sovereignty making a claim and establishing a new sovereign territory, and extending its supreme authority.

◈ Israeli-Palestinian Interim Agreement Oslo II (1995) Map 6 •
◈ Basic Law: Jerusalem, Capital of Israel •
◈ Golan Heights Law •
◈ Egypt and Israel Treaty of Peace w/MAP (1979) •
◈ Jordan-Israeli Peace Treaty (1994) •
◈ Letter dated 12 June 2000 from the Permanent Representative of Lebanon •​

• China and the case of Tibet
• China More recently, in the South China Sea
• Russian Federation and the Crimea.
• Russian Federation and Ukraine
• Bakassi transferred to Cameroon
• New Country South Sudan

Israel is really the Arab Palestinians who have not exercised sovereignty for a thousand years, and have become the squeaky wheel. They have consistently rejected opportunities for peace and sovereignty.

As far as citizenship and private property, I agree with you. That is customary. However, that does not stop a country from stripping citizenship away, as when in 1988 Jordan stripped the citizenship away from West Bank people. And in the Middle East, western customary law is never firm.

There is no international law on how to establish borders. That is all about the acceptance of frontiers.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

Israel has NEVER abided by the Oslo agreement.

They have refused to even consider negotiation. Under Bush, Israel demanded to continue to steal Palestinian land in West Bank DURING NEGOTIATIONS!!! Also, it was Israel that refused to meet the requirements for entering negotiations under the Bush plan for negotiations.

Israel whines about Hamas, but they refused to allow the highly principled and peace oriented government of West Bank to displace Hamas in Gaza. They took serious action to PRESERVE Hamas.

Beyond that, what Israel is doing in West Bank today is a humanitarian atrocity. Plus, it is counter to numerous UN principles that Israel has signed to support.


If you were a Texan and Mexico started taking your land, would you fight back?

 

Saying others do the same thing is no excuse for you doing it too. Keeping them in the Occupied Territories is ethnic cleansing. Deal with it.

 

REF: How can we stop the rockets from landing on Sderot, Israel?
SUBTOPIC: Borders
⁜→ Willreadmore, et al,

(COMMENT)

Israel was in a much better situation, if not legal ground. The Arab Palestinians had no framework yet.
The Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) was recognized by the Arab League in November 1988
Click here for His Majesty's Address to the Nation, July 31, 1988

There was no general expectation that the Oslo Accords would achieve any long-term stability and peace.

Disengagement

"The decision to sever legal and administrative ties with the West Bank allowed Jordan’s electoral law to be changed, redrawing the map to include only East Bank districts. During the same period, mounting economic difficulties led to a spate of rioting in certain parts of the Kingdom. Circumstances had therefore coalesced to produce a situation favoring the resumption of the democratic process King Hussein had initiated early in his reign. In November 1989, general parliamentary elections were held in Jordan for the first time since 1966, ushering in a new era for the institutionalization of Jordan’s democratic experience."​

(COMMENT)

This is just totally wrong. The negotiations were never intended to have pre-conference requirements or preconditions for discussions to peaceful solutions.

(COMMENT)
.
All I candy is that your understanding of principles and what atrocities are very different from mine. These attempts to hang complaints of apartheid, and genocide/ethnic cleansing, and other humanitarian-type crimes are just examples of the Arab Palestinian Drama Queens trying to lay down smoke in order to obscure the potential for peaceful progress.

The Islamic Resistance Movement (HAMAS), which see itself as an Islamic National Liberation and a struggle for an Arab Islamic land, has a general policy that says:

"Palestine is a land that was seized by a racist, anti-human and colonial Zionist project
that was founded on a false promise (the Balfour Declaration), on recognition of a
usurping entity and on imposing a fait accompli by force."​

HAMAS operates under the theory that the Balfour Declaration, the British Mandate, and whatever resolutions and measures that derive from them or are similar to them are "null and void."

HAMAS considered the establishment of “Israel” to be an entirely illegal venture. HAMAS perceives this venture as eroding Arab Palestinian inalienable rights and the will of the territorial Muslims which are bound together by religion. HAMAS wants to retroactively apply international conventions and the right to self-determination that was not even applicable at the time the Allied Supreme Council at San Remo made the decisions they determined necessary (highlights of the list, but not all-inclusive) for Palestine:

• The Principal Allied Powers have agreed to put into effect the Balfour Declaration,
• The Principal Allied Powers have agreed to the establishment of a national home for the Jewish people,
• The Principal Allied Powers have agreed to the reconstituting the Jewish National Home in Palestine,
• The Principal Allied Powers have agreed to the development of self-governing institutions,
• The Principal Allied Powers have agreed to safeguard the civil and religious rights of all people of the Mandate.
• The Principal Allied Powers have agreed to secure the cooperation of all Jews People willing to assist in the establishment of the Jewish National Home,
• The Principal Allied Powers have agreed to facilitate Jewish immigration, in cooperation with the Jewish Agency,

​

HAMAS also has determined that, without regard to Article 68 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, resisting by any and all means is a legitimate right.

The more general Palestine National Charter does not differ that much from that of HAMAS Policy in all the important points:

• Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine.
• The partition of Palestine in 1947 and the establishment of Israel are entirely illegal,
• The Balfour Declaration, the Mandate for Palestine, and everything that has been based upon them are deemed null and void.
• The Arab Palestinian people, expressing themselves by the armed Palestinian revolution, reject all solutions which are substitutes for the total liberation of Palestine and reject all proposals aiming at the liquidation of the Palestinian problem, or its internationalization.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

I believe that the G-d of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is setting up a spiritual awakening worldwide that will affect Israel and her neighbouring nations......
I do believe that we are getting close to the time predicted in Zechariah chapter fourteen where nations neighbouring Israel will allow Jews and Noahides living in
their territory to freely travel to Jerusalem to observe the Festival of Tabernacles / Sukkot.

I even think that a rather unusual angle on the questions being generated by this spiritual awakening will shock many people all over the world..... and many of
these surprised people will begin to adopt more and more aspects of Judaism... such as respect for the weekly Sabbath!!!!

.... "Blessed is the man that doeth this, and the son of manthat layeth hold on it; that keepeth the sabbath from polluting it, and keepeth his hand from doing any evil.

Neither let the son of the stranger, that hath joinedhimself to the LORD, speak, saying, The LORD hath utterly separated me from his people: neither let the eunuch say, Behold, I am a dry tree.
For thus saith the LORD unto the eunuchs that keep my sabbaths, and choose the things that please me, and take hold of my covenant;"
Even unto them will I give in mine house and within my walls a place and a name better than of sons and of daughters: I will give them an everlasting name, that shall not be cut off.
Also the sons of the stranger, that join themselves to the LORD, to serve him, and to love the name of the LORD,to be his servants, every one that keepeth the sabbathfrom polluting it, and taketh hold of my covenant;

Isaiah 56

and.....

... "For as the new heavens and the new earth, which I will make, shall remain before me, saith the LORD, so shall your seed and your name remain.
And it shall come to pass, that from one new moon to another, and from one sabbath to another, shall all fleshcome to worship before me, saith the LORD.
Isaiah 66:22 and 23)





http://www.politicalforum.com/index...-and-the-media.331262/page-13#post-1073423183

An important part of this concept working would be Jewish scholars and teachers admitting that important Jewish teachers could well reincarnate as Gentiles...... (or perhaps as Ephrayimites who might appear to be Gentiles)?!

Former Atheist Rabbi Alon Anava's near death experience account corresponds with Matthew chapter four on many levels... and his teachings since 2001 correspond with Matthew chapters five, six and seven on many levels.... .which to my thinking means that the Stick of Joseph is beginning to be twisted together with the Stick of Judah and Levi.