Soccer Dad

The UN is really upset the Jews won. That's why there's the annual two-day Israelphobia celebration at Turtle Bay. The only country in the world to have its existence mourned is Israel. Which says volumes about the meaning or lack of it - of UN support for a Middle East peace, in particular, the so-called two-state solution.

Israel is the child of the UN, and what a delinquent child it turned out to be, which has been taken to task by the General Assembly and the Security Council more often than any other nation.Unbashed, it has long since had a answer to that- it simply denies the body which gave it birth any moral authority whatsoever.

The degenerate low-life who calls himself sASS is not interested in actual facts, only in spewing anti-Semitic bile.

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/viewarticle.cfm/the-illegal-settlements-myth-15295

Though routinely referred to nowadays as “Palestinian” land, at no point in history has Jerusalem or the West Bank been under Palestinian Arab sovereignty in any sense of the term. For several hundred years leading up to World War I, all of Israel, the Kingdom of Jordan, and the putative state of Palestine were merely provinces of the Ottoman Empire. After British-led Allied troops routed the Turks from the country in 1917-18, the League of Nations blessed Britain’s occupation with a document that gave the British conditional control granted under a mandate. It empowered Britain to facilitate the creation of a “Jewish National Home” while respecting the rights of the native Arab population. British Colonial Secretary Winston Churchill later partitioned the mandate in 1922 and gave the East Bank of the Jordan to his country’s Hashemite Arab allies, who created the Kingdom of Jordan there under British tutelage.

Following World War II, the League of Nations’ successor, the United Nations, voted in November 1947 to partition the remaining portion of the land into Arab and Jewish states. While the Jews accepted partition, the Arabs did not, and after the British decamped in May 1948, Jordan joined with four other Arab countries to invade the fledgling Jewish state on the first day of its existence. Though Israel survived the onslaught, the fighting left the Jordanians in control of what would come to be known as the West Bank as well as approximately half of Jerusalem, including the Old City. Those Jewish communities in the West Bank that had existed prior to the Arab invasion were demolished, as was the Jewish quarter of the Old City of Jerusalem.

After the cease-fire that ended Israel’s War of Independence in 1948, Jordan annexed both the West Bank and East Jerusalem. But, as was the case when Israel annexed those same parts of the ancient city that it would win back 19 years later, the world largely ignored this attempt to legitimize Jordan’s presence. Only Jordan’s allies Britain and Pakistan recognized its claims of sovereignty. After King Hussein’s disastrous decision to ally himself with Egypt’s Nasser during the prelude to June 1967, Jordan was evicted from the lands it had won in 1948.

This left open the question of the sovereign authority over the West Bank. The legal vacuum in which Israel operated in the West Bank after 1967 was exacerbated by Jordan’s subsequent stubborn refusal to engage in talks about the future of these territories. King Hussein was initially deterred from dealing with the issue by the three “no’s” of Khartoum. Soon enough, he was taught a real-world lesson by the Palestine Liberation Organization, which fomented a bloody civil war against him and his regime in 1970. With the open support of Israel, Hussein survived that threat to his throne, but his desire to reduce rather than enlarge the Palestinian population in his kingdom ultimately led him to disavow any further claim to the lands he had lost in 1967. Eventually, this stance was formalized on July 31, 1988.

Thus, if the charge that Israel’s hold on the territories is illegal is based on the charge of theft from its previous owners, Jordan’s own illegitimacy on matters of legal title and its subsequent withdrawal from the fray makes that legal case a losing one. Well before Jordan’s renunciation, Eugene Rostow, former dean of Yale Law School and undersecretary of state for political affairs in 1967 during the Six-Day War, argued that the West Bank should be considered “unallocated territory,” once part of the Ottoman Empire. From this perspective, Israel, rather than simply “a belligerent occupant,” had the status of a “claimant to the territory.”

To Rostow, “Jews have a right to settle in it under the Mandate,” a right he declared to be “unchallengeable as a matter of law.” In accord with these views, Israel has historically characterized the West Bank as “disputed territory” (although some senior government officials have more recently begun to use the term “occupied territory”).

Because neither Great Britain, as the former trustee under the League of Nations mandate, nor the since deceased Ottoman Empire—the former sovereigns prior to the Jordanians—is desirous or capable of standing up as the injured party to put Israel in the dock, we must therefore ask: On what points of law does the case against Israel stand?

The Occuppied Territories are considered illegal and not disputed by the UN, World Court and the international community. There is no dispute about that, only for the purblind orthodoxy, who must reassure themselves constantly with the myth that international law does not apply to Israel.
Luckily its only know nothing American zionist who believe this propoganda.

There is PLENTY to dispute about it. Go ahead and read the article I linked to. You are far too narrow-minded and bigoted to even consider its arguments. Explain on what ACTUAL LEGAL basis is Israel's so-called "occupation" illegal or the "settlements". You provide no facts. Don't give me this bullshit about what the UN, controlled by the islamic, arab block of nations claims, or what is the international consensus. The arab countries control the world's energy resources, are far more numerous than Jews and the world fears islamic terrorism. It's obvious why the world sides with the arab-muslim narrative over a tiny nation of 6 million Jews with no natural resources the world depends on. That doesn't make it fact. I doubt you read the article I linked to. And if you did, you did not bother to refute anything it said, only robotically spouting the same leftist talking points.

The UN's judgement of Israel is as legitimate as a jury of klansmen in the old south deciding the fate of a black defendant.

UN resolutions 267, 497,446,452,465,471 and 476 find Israels occupation and the settlement illegal. In Resolution 465 the settlements are even described as a "flagrant violation".The International Court of Justice, has found the settlements to be illegal under international law in 2004. In 2006-08 the United Nations General Assembly has passed several resolutions denouncing all settlements in the occupied territories as illegal, Resolutions 61/118, 62/108, 63/93. Israels argument has been rejected by the International Community- no dispute.

That's the best you can do, citing UN resolutions put forth by the block of arab-islamic tyrannies and terror states with most of the rest of the world bullied into voting along if they want to do business with them.

The fact is that the world no longer cares what international law is. International law has become simply a bludgeon in the hands of people who can get the largest number of the most violent people to scream the “legal” conclusions that they want. Why is Israel ’s presence an “illegal occupation?” Because Israel ’s enemies have gotten sufficient numbers of people and organizations to say so for so long and so many times. No legal authority will list that as a source of international law but de facto, it has become the main source.

The UN General Assembly was never given the power to make legally binding decisions but, as Dore Gold has pointed out, the UN no longer abides by its own Charter, so why should it cavil about such technicalities. The 1949 armistice lines have become sacrosanct international borders simply because the General Assembly suggested them and the Arabs now want them to be international borders. The Arab states themselves insisted when they signed the armistice that they never be considered as international borders but now they want them considered sacred, even though they include Israeli territory occupied by Syrian aggression in 1948, and there is an international legal principle, embedded in the UN Charter, against acquisition of territory by force, which the Arab states site as reason why Israeli “occupation” is illegal.

The law that applies to Israel acquisition in a defensive war does not apply to Syrian acquisition in a naked aggression. Why not? Because that’s what the lawless majority and the howling masses want.

Laura, i sorry to say your either dumb or plain stupid. The international community views Isreals Occupation of Arab lands as illegal. There no disputing that.

YOU are the one dumb or plain stupid. International consensus does not confer legitimacy on false claims that Israel is illegally occupying the territories. There is no actual legal basis for that claim, in fact if you had read the article I linked to, it provides proof that Israel has legal rights to the territories and of course eastern Jerusalem.

As I said in an above post, it's like a jury of klansmen in the old south deciding that a black defendent is guilty. That's the analogy I use regarding the UN's judgments of Israel.

The article your referring to is just a opinion, thats all it is, which has been rejected by the international community and the World Court which recognizes Israels claim "null and void".

'There is no dispute about that, only for the purblind orthodoxy, who must reassure themselves constantly with the myth that international law does not apply to Israel'
Thanks, you just proved my point.

It's not an opinion, its based on legal fact. I don't think you actually read it not that it matters if you did. Facts aren't going to convince you, such is your hatred for Israel and Jews.

"The article your referring to is just a opinion, thats all it is, which has been rejected by the international community and the World Court which recognizes Israels claim "null and void"."
...............................................
To repeat, that's as legitimate as a jury of klansmen in the old south deciding that a black defendent is guilty.

Israel need not recognize the validity of UN resolutions put forth by its enemies.

I ask, who's territory is being illegally "occupied" by Israel? The so-called "palestians" never had control of it in the first place, there never was a sovereign nation of Palestine.

The Palestinian People did have 'control of it'. That always the arguement for the purblind,'that there never was a sovereign state of Palestine, so the Palestinians never existed', but they fail to see other facts that the 'Palestinians who never existed' owned over 90% of the lands, had government intitutions and a growing economy,had a defined territory with borders, their own currency and even a national anthem , all in the 1931.In 1919 the Paris Peace Conference recognised Palestine under the mandatory system as �provisionally independent nation subject to the rendering of administrative advice and assistance by a Mandatory until such time as they are able to stand by themselves�. That was the British job during their mandate of Palestine, to help the Palestinians govern themselves after the Ottoman rule.But we all know what happened instead beause of the violence intitiated by a bunch of jewish colonialist and illegal immigrants.

You fail to acknowledge that Jews owned land in Judea and Samaria and eastern Jerusalem for generations and were ethnically cleansed when Jordan confiscated the areas.

The Jews in 1947 owned the merest fraction of land in East Jerusalem- 0.6% .In the whole of Palestine the zionist colonist could only aquire less than 8% of the land.
"We take the land first and the law comes after" stated Yehoshafat Palmon,adviser to the Mayor on Arab Affairs,in remarkable candour and put it in a nutshell the Israeli Government's strategy for taking what did not belong to it.
Every Jewish town in Israel is built on the ruins of a Palestinian town. Palestine was never partitioned in 1940,s it was destroyed by the Jewish colonialist and then rebuilt with the vast majority of the indigenous people expelled to make way for a new people, the Jewish people.
That why I've always said, that the arabs haven't even come close to matching the Jews in the art of terror.

The Jews ARE the indigenous people going back thousands of years while the arabs are the colonialist occupiers. Eastern Jerusalem had a Jewish majority until Jordan ethnically cleansed Jews after Jordan captured and illegally occupied it. Judea and Samaria were Jewish long before the arabs invaded and occupied the areas. Where do you think the name JUDEA comes from. Jordan changed its name to the "west bank". No one comes close to the arab-muslims in the art of conquest, colonialism, ethnic cleansing and the destruction of the religions and cultures of indigenous people from the Middle East, to Africa, the Indian subcontinent etc.

You live in a fantasy world full of myths and propoganda, but then again this is a propoganda web site full of myths.
Didn't the Jews conquer the 'Land of Canaan'???
When you look at all the statistics of the time in 1947 the Zionist could only aquire 18% of the land in Jerusalem. And only in frantic effort to pack the city, the Jews had retained a majority.On the eastern side of Jerusalem, the Jews represented a much smaller portion of the population and owned 0.6 % of the land.
Taking the land has alwayed been Zionisms basic impulse and taking it in Jerusalem is a sacred compulsion. The Jews in a frantic progamme of expropriation and construction, immigration and settlements, sought to obliterate, as quickly has possible and by sheer phyical presence, the remaining Arab claim to Jerusalem, which was built not only on sentiment and centuries of sovereignty, but on the abstract legality of immemorial possession of the land. Its the standard zionist policy of "we take the land and the law comes after".

"You live in a fantasy world full of myths and propoganda"
...............................................
You are describing yourself here.

There are no Caanans any longer. The Jews were there before the arabs, so the Jews have a better claim to the land. Deal with it. The arabs have no claims to Jerusalem. Jerusalem is not mentioned even once in the koran and the notion of Jerusalem being sacred to islam is a hoax. The muslims let it rot when they occupied it. Numerous archeological evidence exists as to the Jewish historical presence in Jerusalem. No amount of historical facts matter to anti-Semites however.

This discussion is going around in circles, I see no point in continuing to debate someone so unreasonable and full of hate. Maybe someone else would like to add something.

You really have no idea, do you.
Its not Muslim verses Jews for land ownership because what is written in the bible or koran.
The Palestinians are the descendants of the Arabs who were first and original inhabitants of the land. All the invaders of Palestine were assimulated by the indigenous population, including the Jews. The Moslem Arab conquest of Palestine didn't involve any mass immigration from the Arab Peninsula into Palestine or any colonization of that country. The orginal inhabitants were converted to Islam and the predominately Arab Christian population became predominately Arab Moslem.Thus the Palestinian were a people of various religions which included Islam , Christianity and Judaism. Before when the Jews started to immigrate to Palestine in 1880 there were approx 12,000 Palestinian Jews compare to over 500,000 Moslem and Christian Palestinians.
Judaism is a religion, not a ethnicity.

"The Palestinians are the descendants of the Arabs who were first and original inhabitants of the land."
..............................................
This is absolutely wrong. Palestinian claims to be related to the Canaanites are a recent phenomenon and contrary to historical evidence. The Canaanites disappeared from the face of the earth three millennia ago, and no one knows if any of their descendants survived or, if they did, who they would be. "Palestinians" are descendants of arabs who migrated to Palestine after the Jews came and built it up. Palestine was vitually empty in the mid 19th century.

I know that what it says in Jewish Mythology but there was no mass immigration by Arabs from the Pennisula into Palestine :
According to historical records part, or perhaps the majority, of the Moslem Arabs in this country descended from local inhabitants, mainly Christians and Jews, who had converted after the Islamic conquest in the seventh century AD (Shaban 1971; Mc Graw Donner 1981). These local inhabitants, in turn, were descendants of the core population that had lived in the area for several centuries, some even since prehistorical times (Gil 1992).

You are the one repeating what you read from arab mythology. Writings from the mid 19th century showed Palestine to be largely uninhabited. Jews came and built the land up and the arabs followed.

Miraculous , so its true.
" The Jews were a people without land and Palestine was a land without people"

Jewish mythology is really boring!!!!!.