In four parts I will be exposing the mythical narrative and the lies. The truth is identified within these four missives and makes unpalatable reading for the enemies of the Jewish State of Israel and for the antisemitic mobs on both the Right and the Left. The media lemmings should they choose to read this should also feel exasperated.
Why have mainstream media purposely ignored the facts and allowed the fiction to spread unchecked, unchallenged and multiply?
The Palestinian Religious Claims
The Palestinian Legal Claims
The Palestinian Refugees
The Palestinian Historical Claims
———————————–
Historical Claims:
Historical evidence is in abundance verifying that travelers, researchers, historians and writers who recorded their visits to the land currently claimed by “palestinians” never wrote about nor identified the existence of an indigenous group called “palestinians”. Perhaps they forgot or all decided over the centuries to purposely ignore those identifying as“palestinians” All however certainly described the existence of Jews in numerous locations, towns and villages such as Shechem , Hevron, Haifa, Safed ,Caesarea, Gaza (yes Gaza), Ramleh, Sidon, Galilee, Kfar Alma, as just a few of many examples as well as Jews being the majority population in Jerusalem. Even Napoleon Bonaparte recognized the land as belonging to Jews but nowhere did he record any “palestinians” claiming historical land rights. Further research identifies many more travelers – pilgrims, writers, political and military figures who throughout their evidenced travels found Jews but never “palestinians” and the only Arabs to be found were itinerant Bedouins. A few of these travelling researchers are listed with a selection of their books and span the period between the sixteenth and nineteenth centuries:
Siebald Rieter, died 1488 and Johann Tucker (date of death unknown) Maps to Jerusalem
Felix Fabri, died 1502,- Pilgrim And Preacher,
Martin Kabatnik, died 1503,- From Jerusalem to Cairo,
Arnold Van Harff, died 1505 – The Pilgrimage ,
Father Michael Naud, date of death unknown, – The Jerusalem Connection 1674 ,
Sir George Adam Smith, died 1790 – Jerusalem,
Alphonse de Lamartine -died 1869 , – From Marseilles to Jerusalem,
Sir George Gawler, died 1869 – Syria and its Near Prospects,
Edward Robinson died 1863 – Biblical Researches,.
Mark Twain (AKA Samuel Clemens) died 1910 – The Innocents Abroad.
How can it be that all these respected persons and the others listed within this post, who wrote of their travels to the area that the “palestinians,” who apparently have been indigenous to the area they currently claim for millennia were never seen, identified nor written of by those who travelled there? It’s simply because they never existed as a race, people, tribe nor culture. Today’s “palestinians” are simply immigrants who came to the geographical area for the economic benefits brought about by Zionism.
Let us be totally clear – there has never been, and never was, a race, a tribe, a people, nor a culture at any period in history known as “palestinians” who were indigenous to the land they now claim . Only since 1967 enemies of the Jewish State of Israel have perpetrated this lie. During the previous centuries no traveller who wrote about his exploits ever identified the “palestinians.” They are a myth that have morphed into fact promoted by bigots, intellectual incompetents and racists . Fake news has assisted in facilitating the anthropological mythical of the “palestinians” who falsely lay claim to Eretz Israel: the Land of The Jewish People.
“What is the mother tongue of the indigenous “palestinian?,” I ask. Naturally without hesitation the answer is Arabic easily verified by numerous sources. It is an absolute and indisputable fact – the “palestinian” Charters are in Arabic, the school curriculum is in Arabic, the daily papers are in Arabic, etc. etc. However, to a disciplined researcher such as myself therein lies a paradox which unfortunately exposes unpalatable facts for both the “palestinians”and their supporters.
There is no sound for the letter ‘P‘ (for “palestinian”) in Arabic. Just take that in for a moment and mentally process what I have just written… there is no sound for ‘P’ in Arabic. Palestinian is simply the English language adjective and bastardisation of the Latin word for the geographical area Hadrian named ”Palaestina’‘ in the second century AD. Naming the area Palaestina was his way of further humiliating the Jews having previously annihilated their revolt and uprising against the Roman invasion. Renaming the area from Judea to Palestina after the ancient foes of the Jewish people, the Philistines, was the ultimate humiliation. There are two dictionary definitions of the word Philistine one being “uncultured or uncouth heathen” the other being the “extinct people from the Greek islands.”
You will note that there was no “palestinian” uprising or claims to Jerusalem against the Romans – only a Jewish fight for their indigenous lands. Thus, it is from the term Philistines that the name Palestine derives and both Philistines and Palestinians have the commonality of being invaders – the former from the Greek Islands, the latter from surrounding Arab countries. The very definition of their name has nothing whatsoever to do with ethnicity but is simply a descriptive application. Furthermore and paradoxically the origination of the name Philistine derives from the Hebrew ”Peleshet’‘ meaning invaders or penetrators.
Is it not therefore an absurd irony that today’s Palestinians call themselves after either extinct Greek seafaring invaders or uncultured, uncouth heathens? Why would any people, tribe or race accept, indeed be proud of such negative descriptions? The former immediately debunks their very existence and the latter is not the kind of description to take pride in. Even more imbecilic, why call themselves a name they cannot pronounce in their mother tongue? An English word, not Arabic and with such harmful definitions to their history and culture.
“No, no,” shout the offended “palestinians” – “we are called “Fellastinians,” that is the Arabic word for us.” Oh really, this disciplined researcher retorts in astonishment. But ‘Fellastine‘ is simply the Arab pronunciation of Philistine and therefore apart from one letter to conform with Arabic vocalization the “Fellastinians” are still naming themselves after extinct Greek sailors or uncouth/uncultured heathens – and in Queen’s English – you really couldn’t make it up – it’s Monty Pythonesque! (that was a British comedy mocking absurd situations which were themselves exaggerated).
Further investigation is surely necessary as it is patently imbecilic that supposedly, indigenous peoples should be satisfied with such negative and offensive definitions debunking all claims of indigenous ethnicity. So we research into the “Fellastinian” historical archives in the expectation of discovering a people or persons who identified as indigenous “Fellastinian” leaders; or a war, battle or conflict fought by indigenous “Fellastinians” against any domestic or foreign invaders throughput the centuries of warfare in their apparent homeland, perhaps in an attempt to recapture their cherished Jerusalem . Maybe we will find archaeological evidence of a “Fellastinian” currency, town or city; maybe an historical construct originated and built by indigenous “Fellastinians” and the name of the architect. If the “Fellastinians” are indigenous then history and evidence must surely reveal the name of any one, just one historical “Fellastinian” King, Queen, Prince, Princess , President, Imam , Writer, Poet, Scribe, Soldier, Sailor, Tinker, Tailor ,Butcher, Baker or Candlestick maker.
Alas, there is no such evidence to be found of any such race, culture, or people. Indeed the numerous travellers to the area such as Edward Webbe, 1590, Adrian Reland 1665, Count Constantine Francois Volney 1750, William Thackeray, 1844, Gustav Flaubert, 1850 , James Finn 1857, Mark Twain, 1867, and B.W. Johnson, 1892 are just several of many who never found, discovered or wrote about the indigenous “palestinians” or“Fellastinian” . These itinerant scribes did not write about them or the villages they supposedly inhabited because they never existed . And there is a reason for their nonexistence and it is simply because they are a recent construct invented by those political organizations and Arab countries who sought to eliminate the Jewish State of Israel and deconstruct the geographical area. And what is equally astounding is that the fiction has morphed into fact. The anthropological miracle we know today as “palestinians” have revised history so that a non-existent people have existed apparently since time immemorial.
Just relating to the above it is interesting to understand their descriptions of the area. Adrian Reland wrote about the non existence of Arab place names, the Muslims having deserted the area – indeed they immigrated to the area en masse only on the back of the economic benefits offered by Zionism at the turn of the 20th Century. Tewlik Bey El Houran, Governor of Houran Province, Southwest Syria, complained in a Syrian – French newspaper La Syne, August 12th 1934 that in the last few months 30,000 – 36,000 Syrians had entered and settled to work in “palestine” Remarkably that would account for around ten per cent of the so called “palestinians” Israel is wrongfully accused of ‘”thnically cleansing from their indigenous homelands.”
Gunner Edward Webbe 1590 wrote.
”Nothing there is to be seen in Jerusalem but a little of the old walls which is yet remaining and all the rest is grass, moss and weeds much like to a piece of rank or moist ground.”
Thomas Shaw, British archaeologist, 1750.
”The land is lacking in people to till its fertile soil.”
Count Constantine Francois Volney, 18th century French historian.
“It is a ruined and desolate land.’‘
Gustav Flaubert 1850
” …found ruins everywhere.”
James Finn , British Consul 1857
‘‘The country is in a considerable degree empty of inhabitants and therefore its greatest need is of a body of population.”
Christian travellers to the area in the mid 1800’s wrote that “Arabs’ cannot be considered but temporary residents. They pitched their tents in its grazing fields or built their places of refuge in its ruined cities. They created nothing in it since they were strangers to the land – the desert wind brought them hither.’‘
William Thackeray in his 1844 essay From Jaffa to Jerusalem similarly described the area as had described all of the above.
Cooks Tourist Handbook for Palestine and Syria 1876
‘’ Above all other countries in the world Palestine is now a land of ruins . In Judea it is hardly an exaggeration to say that for miles and miles there is no appearance of present life or habitation .”
And latter Mark Twain wrote thus.
”There is not a solitary village throughout its whole extent 0f (Valley of Jezreel, Galilee) , not for 30 miles in either direction. One may ride 10 miles hereabouts and not see ten human beings. For the sort of solitude to make one dreary come to Galilee, Nazareth is forlorn…Jericho lies a mouldering ruin. Bethlehem and Bethany in their poverty and humiliation untenanted by any living creature. A desolate country whose soil is rich enough but is given over wholly to weeds, a silent, mournful expanse…. a desolation. We never saw a human being on the whole route. Hardly a tree or shrub anywhere. Even the olive tree and the cactus, those fast friends of a worthless soil had almost deserted the country which sits in sackcloth and ashes… desolate and unlovely.”
This description by Twain, (Samuel Clemence) in the Innocents Abroad 1867 and the photos of the early 20th century photographer Leo Kahn prove beyond doubt , not that any further proof is necessary, that the so called “palestinian” (or “Fellastinian”) had never inhabited the area as they currently claim.
Further exposure of the “palestinian” myth as a people, race or culture comes from the mouths of those who morphed into “palestinians” and from many Arab religious leaders, politicians, terrorists and scholars. Note too that within the Qur’an there is not one mention of either the name places Jerusalem nor “palestine” although modern revisionist translations have successfully included such. From an Islamic religious perspective the area known as Palestine is bequeathed, bestowed and promised to the Jewish people in numerous Suras within the Qur’an and therefore it is Islamophobic, is it not, to support “palestinian” claims to the area?
For reference the following Suras are proof of this:
2.47; – Al Baqara ‘‘O Children of Israel .. call to mind the special favour which I , Allah bestowed upon you and that I preferred you above the whole world ”
17.104 – Al Israa ‘‘ And We Allah said thereafter to the Children of Israel ‘ Dwell securely in the land of Promise’
The following other Suras explicitly confirm similar – that the Promised Land, was bequeathed to the Jewish people by Allah through Mohammed. 2.122, 5.21, 7.137, 7.138, 10.93, 17.2, 17.104, 20.80, 40.53, 44.32, 45.16
In all these Suras Allah in clear and concise Arabic asserts that he fulfilled his promise to reward the Jewish people, the Children of Israel with the Promised Land, the Land of Milk and Honey, Surely defying Allah, Mohammed and the Qur’an is mocking Islam and is therefore undoubtedly Islamophobic.
Ibn Tamiyyah 1263 -1328, one of the most revered Islamic scholars –
”In Jerusalem there is not a place one calls sacred and the same holds for the tomb of Hebron”.
Walid Shoebat – former PLO terrorist – ” Why is it that on June 4th 1967 I was a Jordanian and overnight I became a ‘palestinian?’ We were Jordanian until the Jews returned to Jerusalem then all of a sudden we were ‘palestinian.’ When I finally realised the lies and myths I was taught, it is my duty as a righteous man to speak out.”
Joseph Farah, Arab writer, journalist and historian in his 1967 essay
Myths of the Middle East –
“There has never been a land known as ‘palestine’ governed by ‘palestinians,’ indistinguishable from Jordanians another recent invention. Syrians, Iraqis etc. Keep in mind that Arabs control 99.9% of the Middle East and Israel one tenth of one per cent – but that’s too much for the Arabs. They want it all. And ultimately that is what the fighting with Israel is today …no matter how many land concessions the Israelis make, it will never be enough .”
LINK
Zuhair Mushin, military commander of the PLO and member of the PLO Executive Council , March 1977 interview with Dutch daily Trouw
”…..it is only for political reasons that we carefully underline the ‘palestinian’ identity yes the existence of a separate ‘palestinian’ identity serves only tactical purposes. The creation of a ‘palestinian State’ is a new tool in the continuing battle against Israel.”
Auni Bey Abdul-Hadi , Syrian Arab leader to the British Peel Commission, 1937.
”There is no such country as ‘palestine.’ ‘Palestine’ is a term the Zionists invented. There is no ‘palestine’ in the Bible nor the Qur’an . ‘Palestine’ is alien to us, it was the Zionists who introduced it.”
On a separate but still relevant issue, the Arab leaders who testified to the 1937 Peel Commission stated categorically that no land was stolen from the Arabs by the Zionists – it was all paid for by legal contracts . Statelands and Wastelands had been set aside for Jewish population and were in the legal control of the colonial powers to do so – that is, the British and previously the Turks. LINK
Ahmad Shukan 1956, Arab representative to the United Nations
‘‘Such a creature as ‘palestine’ does not exist at all.”
Professor Philip Hitti, Arab professor and historian, 1946
‘‘There is no such thing as ‘palestine’ in history, absolutely not.”
Syrian dictator Hafez Assad to the PLO Leader, Yassir Arafat (who was perversely , Egyptian)
”Never forget this one point, there is no such thing as a ‘palestinian’ people, there is only Syria.”
For those of you who have persevered with this post, it will not surprise you to learn that Jerusalem was never mentioned in the original 1964 ‘palestinian’ Charter, such is the ‘palestinian’ love for the Holy City. Nor when it was in Jordanian control for near on twenty years did one Muslim Head of State visit Jerusalem to pray, again proof of the lack of respect and claim to the Holy City. Indeed in such contempt was Jerusalem held that the Jordanians desecrated it and moved all the Government Offices from Jerusalem to Amman to decrease Jerusalem’s importance. The writings of Joseph Farah above ring so true about Arab / Islamic greed for land .
Those who support the ‘palestinians‘ are supporting political parties formed in the mid 1960’s intending as per their Charters of 1964 and 1968 to fulfil the Nazi objectives of the 1930’s, that of Jew extermination. Grotesquely the Hamas Charter of 1988 takes Islamic Nazism to excremental levels by demanding in Article 17 , the extermination of those whose main purpose is to fund hospices, assist the terminally ill or support those parents with physically or mentally disabled children.
Those who defend the mythical ‘palestinians’ should hang their heads in shame for their advocacy of modern day Nazism . Here is one person who will stand up and be counted and expose the human excrement that supports, defends, advocates and sympathises with the enemies of the only Jewish State in the world that just happens to be a multiracial democracy, the absolute antipathy of Islamic Nazism and their supporters.
Religious Claims:
———————————–
“Palestinian” Claims to Jerusalem are Islamophobic
Previously I wrote about the false narrative currently used to delegitimize the Jewish State of Israel. The narrative which through weight of propaganda, ignorance and Jew hatred claims that Israel is an illegal colonial power. Such revisionism was easily debunked in my article and apart from the usual amount of hostile feedback a pro Israel political researcher and activist receives, there was not one, I repeat not one intelligent response disproving or invalidating anything that I had claimed.
Similarly in the post prior to the one about the legal revisionism, I penned an article verifying that today’s “palestinians” were never an ancient people, tribe, race nor culture but are simply a recent, twentieth century construct used as useful idiots by those parties hostile the Jewish State of Israel and Jewish people generally – the anti Dreyfus mob. Again not one response to my post could disprove or invalidate any of my claims.
The second in my series of essays on the “palestinian” subject is to prove that from a religious perspective , the Palestinian claims to Jerusalem are not only false but paradoxically Islamophobic. Here goes:
From a religious Islamic perspective the “palestinian” claim to Jerusalem is a false claim – a claim which actually defies the Koran, and the words of Allah and the prophet, Mohammed. Neither the “palestinian” as a people, tribe, race nor culture , nor Jerusalem as an Islamic place of importance are written of or alluded to within the Koran . The reasonable conclusion, ironically and paradoxically is that support for the “palestinian” ” cause” and Jerusalem as the“palestinian” capital is fundamentally Islamophobic. Muslims all over world in their support of the “palestinian” claims to the landmass known as Israel and the city known as Jerusalem, are not only mocking but are in defiance and disobeying the commands and will of their God Allah.
The Koran is quite specific and in numerous Suras, bestows, bequeaths and promises the Land of Milk and Honey, that is today’s Israel, to the Children of Israel, the Jewish people. “Palestinian” are never mentioned within the Koran yet in many Suras, the land of Israel is promised to the Jewish people, the current false narrative promoted by those enemies of the Jewish State that Jerusalem is sacred to “palestinian” should be offensive to Islam and its millions of adherents. The Koran, Allah and the prophet Mohammed are being ignored, disobeyed and mocked. This may be unpalatable to followers of Islam, the anti Jewish State Islamists and the false Imams spewing such vomit in their sermons but is nevertheless an actuality and an undisputable and undeniable truth. According to many brave Imams and religious Muslim intellectuals, modern, global Islam is in turmoil and will continue to be in turmoil until the false narrative is denied and the false “palestinian” narrative identified, exposed and repudiated.
Let’s explore the facts:
1. Jerusalem is NEVER mentioned in the Koran. It is mentioned 669 times in the Old Testament and if one considers the use of the word Zion which sometimes means Jerusalem, then add another 154 to the 669.
2. Jerusalem is always said in Jewish prayers, grace after meals, the Passover Festival ending etc. etc. It has no such significance in Islam.
3. Muslims actually turn their backs to Jerusalem when they pray – a sign of contempt. This is as a result of the failed attempt by the prophet Mohammed to force Jews to convert to Islam. Many pretended to convert (in order to stop paying taxes as it was not permitted for Muslims to tax other Muslims) but maintained their Judaism. Thus the Quib’la, the direction of prayer, which for some eighteen months instructed Muslims to face Jerusalem was abruptly overturned (Sura 2.14) and to contemptuously identify Judaism with Jerusalem.
The overwhelming school of thought on the Quibla is as I have described above. However there is another school of thought which suggests that Petra, not Jerusalem was the original change of direction for followers. As neither Mecca nor Jerusalem was noted in the Sura and only some three hundred years after the event was either scribed within Islamic tradition the places inferred are certainly open to debate. The most significant research on this subject is ”Quranic Geography” by Dan Gibson. In any event the fact remains that Jerusalem was of no significance to Islam and thus palestinian religious claims on Jerusalem are pure fiction.
4. The world at large has been brainwashed to believe that irrespective of the 3 points above, Jerusalem is considered to be Islam’s third holiest city by citing and repeating a connection that historically could not have happened. According to the Night Journey (Sura 17.1) the prophet Mohammed ascended to Heaven supposedly from The Sacred Mosque (Mecca) to The Furthest Mosque. Lies and years of successfully promoting a false narrative have created fact from fiction. The Furthest Mosque is now supposedly the Al Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem. This is historically, physically, academically and factually impossible. Only fiction, false narrative and fake news has allowed this lie to morph into truth. The historic timeline is that the physical or spiritual ascendency was circa 621 AD and Mohammed died in 632 CE. However, the Al Aqsa Mosque was built between 705 and 715 CE. Therefore whatever Mosque the alleged Night Journey assumed was The Furthest Mosque it was certainly not The Al Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem for that Mosque did not exist during the prophets lifetime.
The ”Furthest Mosque’‘ was never identified with a Mosque in Jerusalem by Muslims – it was associated with Arabia either Medina or Ji’rana near Mecca and visited by Mohammed circa 630 AD.
Further proof of the lie that Jerusalem is of importance from a religious perspective to “palestinians” is the absence of the Sura 17.1, the story of the Night Journey, from the 240 metre mosaic frieze inside the Dome of the Rock. It does not appear. This proves beyond doubt that the Night Journey had not even been thought of or even tenuously linked to Jerusalem during the original Koranic writings.
Other Islamic scholars note, to the embarrassment of modern Islam and the “palestinians” that Mohammed never set foot on the Rock in Jerusalem . Mohammed ibn al-Hanafiya (638 – 700) a close relative of the prophet was scathing in his statement that only Abraham and not Mohammed was responsible for this sacred act.
In 715, the Umayyads (Syrians), in order to increase their following and link the event to Jerusalem, built a mosque on the Temple Mount and called it the Furthest Mosque (al-masjid-al-aqsa, Al Aqsa Mosque) and this was the beginning of the fake news.
5. Jerusalem was NEVER an Arab capital even during Islamic control over the City. Indeed there are numerous accounts from both local and itinerant scholars, scribes, writers and biographers from the 7th to the 19th century (Bishop Arculf, Thomas Shaw, Count Constantine Volney, Flaubert, Melville, Thackeray, Twain and others) describing the dilapidated condition of Jerusalem under Islamic control. The photographic evidence of Leo Kahn and Dwight Elmendorf in the early 20th century provide further evidence of the demise of Jerusalem supposedly Muslim’s third holiest city when under Islamic occupation. Historically Islam allowed Jerusalem to deteriorate during every period when it was the controlling religion over the city.
6. Jerusalem was NEVER mentioned nor once referred to in the PLO Charter of 1964. Let me repeat: When the “palestinians” wrote their original Charter in 1964 there was no mention of nor claim to the city they now promote as being theirs by right since time immemorial from a religious perspective. This is proof beyond doubt that the “palestinian” claim to Jerusalem is probably the greatest political lie of any era. How and why is it so important to palestinians now?
7 .The Arab word for Jerusalem is ‘Al Quds‘ which is an abbreviation of ‘Bayt al MAQDES’ translated means The Holy House. Both of these descriptions are a direct bastardised pronunciation of the original and still current Hebrew ‘Beyt ha – MIKDASH‘ – translated meaning The Holy Temple. But Islam has never had a Temple , only the Jews had one. Thus the Arabic name for Jerusalem has no connection to Mohammed’s heavenly ascendency but refers to the Jewish Temple.
8. Under Jordanian OCCUPATION (capitals intended) between 1948 and 1967 not one Arab Head of State visited Jerusalem. Indeed so religiously unimportant was Jerusalem that Friday prayers stopped being broadcast from the Al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem and transferred to a Mosque in Amman.
9. The Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan when Jerusalem was occupied by them, made a concerted effort to reduce the importance of Jerusalem both religiously and administratively. All Government Offices except for the Ministry of Tourism were closed and relocated to Amman – these included the Arab High Commission, the Supreme Muslim Council, the Treasury of the Waqf and the Religious Endowment bureaus.
10. Even during Islamic / Arab control Jerusalem was never a City of Religious or administrative importance and was NEVER made a Capital.
11. Jerusalem was made holy by the Jewish King David and has never been the capital of any other nation other than the nation of Judaism. It was historically the capital of Judah for over 1000 years, 2500 years before Islam was invented.
12. There are many instances of “palestinians” destroying property and goods within the Holy Temple – defiling carpets, furniture, books, belongings etc. in the Temple Mount . Irrespective of the religion of any individual, all places of worship are treated with respect. Recent history verifies that the “palestinians” have ignored this fundamental, basic, moral rule for places of worship within Jerusalem.
13. Denigrating and disproving “palestinian” religious claims to Jerusalem is quite simple as there are numerous Suras in the Koran identifying that the land of Israel was given by Allah to the Jews – 5.20 /21 and 17:100 – 104 and 59.2 are just three of many. Others examples are 2.40 /2. 47/ 2. 63 / 2.65 /2. 83/2. and 2.87.
Those Muslims claiming Jerusalem to be the historic capital of the “palestinians” are actually in contempt of the Koran. Such contempt paradoxically is somewhat Islamophobic is it not? And those supporting the “palestinian” claims and cause are therefore Islamophobic too, surely? Where is my logic flawed on this? Let us quote directly from some Suras to validate my claims that support for the “palestinian” ”cause” is undoubtedly mocking Allah and Mohammed .
Sura 2.47 Al Baqara – ”O Children of Israel , call to mind the special favour which I , Allah bestowed upon You and that I preferred You above the whole world ”
Sura 5;21-23 Al Maida – “O my People Children of Israel, enter the Holy Land (al – Ard aL – Muqadissa) which God has assigned to you and never turn back.”
Sura 17;104 “Al Israa – We , Allah said thereafter to the Children of Israel Dwell securely in the Land.’‘
Many contemporary Islamic scholars (Mohammed Abu Zayd and Abdul Hadi Palazzi as examples) are claiming that it is the false“palestinian” claim to Jerusalem that is causing the violent rifts in Islam. Syria, Yemen, Libya, Iraq, Lebanon and the Sahel region in Africa are just a few examples where Islam is committing atrocities on Islam. Scholars are suggesting that such immoral behaviour will continue until the false “palestinian” claims to Jerusalem are erased from the current Islamic narrative.
Islamic scholars from previous centuries realised and scribed for time immemorial the absurd , irreligious propaganda linking the importance and relevance of Jerusalem to Islam. Most notable of such learned men were Yaqut 1179 – 1229 , Ibn Taymiya , 1263 – 1328 and Ibn Qayyim al – Jawziya , 1292 – 1350 . Ironically the monster of Libya, Gaddafi, at a meeting of Arab leaders in March 2001, mocked the Arab “palestinian” leaders.Any Korans published and printed after 1970 are revisionist in the extreme by alluding to Jerusalem and “palestinian” rights in verses which originally made no such references. Another reason given by various scholars as to why Islam is in such dire straits currently. Revising Koranic verses is considered beyond redemption.
It may be worth noting that the only time in the last 3000 years that Jerusalem was ‘ Jew free was when Trans – Jordan invaded in 1948 and ethnically cleansed East Jerusalem and Judea / Samaria renaming the area “the West Bank” and from here grew the myth of Arab East Jerusalem. During this period of Jordanian occupation, Jerusalem was defiled and gravestones used for paving (additionally, some grave stones were used in the building of the Hotel Intercontinental, which exists at the very top of the Mount of Olives, and hundreds of graves were displaced to build the adjacent road).
One can analyse from the facts above that any “palestinian”claim to Jerusalem is a myth.
We can study how the Islamic world has ethnically cleansed Christians and Jews from lands which both religions had inhabited since time immemorial. And their churches and synagogues destroyed. Similar is now happening in Muslim countries to mosques by Muslims depending on which brand of Islam is in control.
The claim to Jerusalem by “palestinians” is a false claim and is just the start of a land grab with the purpose of controlling the whole of the Middle East of which Islam currently controls 99.98 per cent. According to the eminent Arab historian Joseph Farah in his essay Myths of the Middle East .
“Israel represents one tenth of one per cent of the land mass . But that’s too much for the Arabs . They want it all and that is ultimately what the fighting is about today….no matter how many land concessions Israel makes , it will never be enough.’’
Unfortunately Israel and her supporters have been overwhelmed by an opposition only too willing to exploit myths and propagate hate to a silent, uninformed majority who through inertia, ignorance and bigotry have allowed such propaganda to permeate the media, political and religious debate, and academia to Israel’s detriment. and in order to delegitimize Israel’s rightful legal, political and religious claims to Israel and Jerusalem.
It’s time to challenge . Please share again and again.
Legal Claims:
——————————-
I posted an essay some weeks ago exposing the myths of the “palestinian” claims to being an indigenous race and the false narrative that has morphed into fact about their historical land rights. The original post , evidenced with statements made by the Arab leadership to the 1937 Peel Commission that all land was legally purchased ( at over inflated prices) by the Jewish people through the organisation specifically established to do so – the Jewish National Fund. State lands and wastelands ( literally areas of land under no private control but claimed as the spoils of war by the Allied Powers after the fall the colonialist Turkish empire) allowed the WW1 victors to distribute such land under the Mandate System. The Grand Mufti of Jerusalem no less, in his testimony to Sir Laurie Hammond during the 1937 Peel Commission stated that all such land previously owned by Arabs had been legally purchased by the Jewish National Fund. No “palestinian” land had been stolen – indeed the “palestinians” as a political entity , race, people, tribe and culture only came into being in 1964.
This post exposes the false claims made about the legal rights of the “palestinians” to land they claim should form part of a “palestinian” State.
We have become used to the media terminology falsely perpetrated by Israel’s enemies, the bigoted and the ignorant, the Dreyfus hate mob as I often refer to them, of Israeli ‘occupied land’ or ‘illegally occupied land’ and the more fashionably used term of the pseudo intellectual left – ‘apartheid’ .
Terminology is the most powerful weapon used to delegitimize Israel’s legal rights and is now so commonly used by the ignorant and the enemies of the Jewish State that fiction has morphed into fact. There is an urgency to debunk the myths and clarify the legal situation verifying and legally validating Israel’s claims to Judea and Samaria – the West Bank, and to Gaza, under International Law . All these geographical areas fall within the legal boundaries of the Jewish State of Israel.
Rest assured that whenever you read or hear the adjectives, occupied or illegally occupied by journalists, politicians academics or TV and Radio presenters when referring to the West Bank or Gaza, they, through sheer ignorance or personal bigotry are spreading and facilitating fake news. The term “Apartheid,” the ultimate verbal offence in their armoury is pure fiction a lie , a false narrative . Fake news at its most powerful. Apartheid means segregation of the races – the “palestinian” are not a race and Israel is a multiracial society where ethnic minorities are treated as equals. There are 400 mosques and numerous Churches in Israel and Muslims and Christians serve in Government and the Armed Forces at the highest level. Indeed many Muslims sought, still seek and took refuge in Israel when persecuted by other Muslims such as the Bahia community and Sudanese and Bosnian Muslims too . How many synagogues and Jews in Gaza? None. And one million Jews have been ethnically cleansed from Muslim countries in the last eighty years . The only nations guilty of Apartheid are those nations where Islam is the predominant religion and Jews and Christians persecuted minorities. Even today the Islamic country of Mauritania practices apartheid against its indigenous black African, non Muslim population – this passes unnoticed by the UN . Slavery against indigenous black Africans by Islamic dominated North African countries and atrocities committed against the same victims by the same perpetrators goes unnoticed by the UN and the EU – only the Jewish State of Israel , guilty of neither apartheid nor slavery is however singled out for political and economic sanction….antisemitism is alive and kicking among the political elite.
Under International Law as identified below, the West Bank and Gaza fall within Israel’s borders . The former was occupied by Jordan during the period 1948 to 1967 but won back by Israel during the defensive war of 1967. Thus Jordan for that period were the occupying power. Israel, in order to achieve peace, latterly decided to leave Gaza but nevertheless under International Law , Gaza legally remains part of Israeli sovereign territory. Unsurprisingly as the ‘“palestinian” did not exist during the Jordanian occupation the Jordanians never offered the occupants an independent state of “palestine”. In 1967 the geographical area was liberated from an occupying nation, Jordan, and rightfully returned to the legal possession of the State of Israel.
Unpalatable as this may be to Israel’s enemies and the ignorant, these are the facts. The internationally binding, legal facts.
For those of you without the will to persevere with the legal intricacies , there are basically five, just five main legal factors to consider when challenging those who continue using the false narrative regarding Israel’s ‘occupation’ of “palestinian” territory.
Two are established legal Treaties that to this day define the borders of Israel under International Law – the League of Nations Covenant of 1922 which incorporates the Mandate System including the Mandate for“palestine, and the UN Charter of 1945 specifically Article 80 . Both legally binding establishing and endorsing International Law contain, codify, endorse, ratify, verify and validate that the borders of Israel include Judea and Samaria (the West Bank) and Gaza.
The Mandate for “palestine” incorporated within the League of Nations Covenant of 1922 survived the demise of the League itself with the formation of the United Nations whereby Article 80 of the UN Charter recognised the Mandate for “palestine” of the League of Nations. This Mandate granted the Jewish people the irrevocable legal rights to live anywhere between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea – a right that remains unaltered in International Law and cannot be amended. As an aside the International Court of Justice in three separate instances reaffirmed and upheld this principle, in 1950 ,1971 and 2004 when considering and judging on similar but different cases. Neither the ICJ nor the UN General Assembly can arbitrarily amend the status of any party as defined within the Mandate for “palestine”
Three other legally binding principles known as Acquired Rights , Estoppel and Uti Possidetis Juris endorse and codify within international law the two documents noted above for time immemorial and it must be reiterated that no UN Resolution has the power to amend , reduce or reconstitute that which has previously been established. It is that simple.
Acquired Rights simply ensures that legal rights once given cannot be taken away and Estoppel establishes that those giving the rights cannot thereafter take those rights away nor amend them . Uti Possidetis Juris simply defines borders of new sovereign states on the basis of their previous administrative frontiers , in this case Israel as the legal documents were originally defined. These five factors legally determine and constitute Israel’s geography and borders and include the West Bank and Gaza for time immemorial.
Other terminology within the current narrative used to delegitimize Israel’s rightful legal claims over all the territory supposedly under illegal Israeli control is that –
1. Israel is in breach of UN resolution 181 of the 1947 Partition Plan, 2. The Hague Regulations of 1907 and 3. The Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949. Again these can easily be debunked and effectively discredited as they have no direct application or relevance to the legal status or to any of the geography under Israel’s legal control, including any ‘settlements’ or the West Bank or indeed Gaza if Israel wished to retake control. Firstly UN Resolution 181 was rejected by the Arabs and thus never implemented and is now an irrelevance. Regarding the Hague Regulations and the Geneva Convention, while both are genuine codes within International Law, paradoxically and perversely they would only apply to any Arab (‘palestinian’) occupation of Israeli territory such as that which occurred during the 1948 -1967 period of Jordanian control. The Hague Regulations are designed to protect the interests of a temporarily ousted sovereign in the context of an occupation – the palestinians have never been a sovereign and even if they were the previous legally binding documents and principles would dismiss such claims. The Geneva Convention often used to delegitimize Israel’s rights, refer to a sovereign forcibly transferring its civilian population into those occupied territories. Israel has never forcibly transferred any of its civilians to any territory . The attempts to use UN Resolution 181, the Hague Regulations and the Geneva Convention to support “palestinian” claims are utterly absurd and though seemingly impressive when used by Israel’s enemies in debate, all as explained are irrelevant. However, even if they were relevant, the established principles and legally binding Treaties referred to above take precedence.
In summary and as with Part 1 of the “palestinian” Fairy Tale, this Part 2 deals with the false narrative that has morphed into facts relating to the legal aspects of the conflict. It’s time we put the record straight and challenged the fake news used solely to delegitimize the Jewish State’s right to its legally defined geography.
Unsurprisingly any nation calling for “palestinian” Statehood would be contravening the United Nations International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms Of Racial Discrimination. General Assembly Resolution 2106 dated December 21 1965 , directly negate the racist “palestinian” Charters of the “palestinian”n Authority (the former dated 1964 , updated 1968) and the “palestinian” Hamas Charter of 1988 which replicate the manifestos of Nazi Germany in numerous articles embedded within both Charters.
Demanding both the elimination of Israel, Jew extermination and the subservience to Islam of all other races and religions , both Charters directly breach, contravene and indeed mock Resolution 2106. The “palestinian”Hamas Charter underlines still further the moral indecency of “palestinian” demands in Article 17 in which it specifically states that various charitable organisations currently assisting all those, for example who are the world’s sickest , poorest and underprivileged , those who are terminally ill , the mentally and physically disabled , abused children and so on, are exterminated. If you don’t believe me then read the Charters of the “palestinians”. Nauseating is an understatement – how can any morally decent diplomat representing their nationals support Islamic Nazism? Each and every individual who has been conned into supporting the “palestinian” cause should first and foremost understand their morally indecent Charters just so those individuals can satisfy themselves on the Nazi equivalent manifestos they are supporting.
Both Charters below sink to the deepest levels of human depravity consistent with the aims and objectives of the most barbaric since the beginning of time. To know that there are those in this world, supporting such depraved objectives in order to achieve “palestinian” Nation State status is truly beyond comprehension and those racists supporting the palestinian ‘cause’ as per the Charters below should be ashamed, re-educated and exposed.
And these Charters have formed the bedrock of the “palestinian” education system – three generations of children inundated with Jew hatred and racist ideology.
Given the number of qualified , pro Israeli academics, politicians both globally and within Israel, and eminent pro Israeli lawyers , who far more eloquently than I could debate the issues raised here – (why oh why are they silent?). In all my years as a an activist when these issues are raised, I have never encountered any challenge that changes the facts as described above. I have encountered rabid hostility and a lack of intellectual debate but never anything that remotely comes close to negating anything I have written and believe to be the legal status as of today and for time immemorial.
But perhaps even truth eventually morphs into the truth instead of maintenance of lies, fiction and fake news will it make any difference.
Even if I am wrong in my challenges and understanding surely by just reviewing a map of the area exposes not Jewish – Israeli – Zionist colonialism but Islamic expansionism and colonialism similar to the Middle Ages and the Christian Crusades or the objectives of Nazi Germany and the colonialist success of the post war Soviet Union. Jewish expansionism, if that was and it was not the objective has been a total failure.
And this is where the writings of the Arab academic and historian Joseph Farah ring so true. In his ‘ Myths Of The Middle East he pens the following…….
”There has never been a land known as “palestine governed by “palestinians” . Palestinians are Arabs , indistinguishable from Jordanians, another recent invention, Syrians, Iraqis, etc. Keep in mind that the Arabs control 99.9 percent of the Middle East lands. Israel represents one tenth of one percent of the landmass . But that’s too much for the Arabs. They want it all . And that is ultimately what the fighting in Israel is about today. No matter how many land concessions the Israelis make, it will never be enough ”.
The legal timeline – only for academic support of the paragraphs above.
Balfour Declaration November 2 1917
A statement of intent of British Foreign Policy – ‘‘Viewed with favour the establishment of a Jewish National Home in “palestine”.
This policy became part of International Law when it was included in the San Remo Resolution (adopted April 25th 1920 by the Supreme Council of the Allied Powers) which was itself incorporated into Article 22 of the 1919 League of Nations Covenant from which the nations of Syria , Lebanon and Iraq emerged.
The San Remo document was further incorporated within the Treaty of Sevres and remained unchanged in the ratified Treaty of Lausanne of 1923. Faisal – Weizmann Agreement for Arab – Jewish Cooperation January 1919
‘’We Arabs …. look with the deepest sympathy on the Zionist movement…. we will wish the Jews a most hearty welcome home . I and my people look forward to a future in which we will help you and you will help us so that the countries in which we are mutually interested may once again take their places in the community of the civilised peoples of the world’’
Smuts Resolution, January 1919
Jan Christian Smuts formulated the details in a memorandum which became known as the Smuts Resolution. Officially endorsed by the Council of 10 on January 30 1919 – “palestinian State . Became Article 22 of The League of Nations Covenant which governed and established the Mandates System.
Also incorporated within the Treaty of Versailles and other peace treaties made with Germany, Austria-Hungary, Bulgaria and Turkey after WW1.
Paris Peace Conference February 1919 In which the Mandate for “palestine was reviewed for inclusion within the League of Nations Covenants and where the Council of Ten endorsed the development of “palestine” into a Jewish Commonwealth with extensive boundaries.
Treaty of Versailles June 1919
The League of Nations Covenant which itself created the Mandate System forms the preamble of the Peace Treaty of Versailles.
San Remo Resolution April 1920
The Magna Carta of the Jewish people , it became Article 95 of the Treaty of Sevres and retained its validity as an act of
International Law when inserted into the Preamble of the Mandate for ““palestine”” by 52 States of the League of Nations .
Article 22 of the L of N Covenant also implemented the Mandate for ““palestine””, the Balfour Declaration and the San Remo Resolution.
The Mandate has 58 Articles and is the official Legal creation of Israel / ““palestine”” adopted by the 52 States and
by the Supreme Council of the Principal Allied Powers
Under this Resolution the Principal Allied Powers charged the British Government with the responsibility and legal obligation of putting into effect the Balfour Declaration and the borders of Israel / ““palestine”” including Cis and TransJordan.
It combined Article 22 of the League of Nations with the Balfour Declaration .
Arab National aspirations recognised too –
Saudi Arabia / Hijaz 1931
Iraq (Mesopotamia ) 1932
Lebanon 1943 and Syria -under French Mandate 1946
Treaty of Sevres, Article 95 , August 10 1920
The San Remo Resolution became Article 95 of The treaty of Sevres which was itself inserted into the Preamble of The Mandate For ““palestine”” thus becoming an act of International Law when confirmed by the League of Nations
Franco British Boundary Convention – December 23 1920
Identified and confirmed all borders of ““palestine”” from Dan to Beersheba . In other words the borders of present day Israel would embrace the geographical historical areas settled by the twelve tribes of Israel both East and West of the Jordan River.
Agreed by David Lloyd George and Georges Clemenceau defined ““palestine”” as from
Dan to Beersheba and also included Trans-Jordan , Saudi, Mesopotamia, Syria
The Mandate for ““palestine”” – July 22 ,1922
This included and implemented both the Balfour Declaration and the League of Nations Covenant Article 22 which itself included and incorporated the San Remo Resolution .
As Howard Grief, the internationally acclaimed expert penned –
” All of these were building blocks in the legal structure that was created for the purpose of bringing about the establishment of an independent Jewish State. The Balfour Declaration stated the principle or object of a Jewish State. The San Remo Resolution gave it the stamp of International Law . The Mandate furnished all the details and means for the realisation of the Jewish State ”.
The idea of an Internationally binding Legal Covenant was the idea of US President, Woodrew Wilson containing his 14 points of January 8 1918.
Mandate system established and governed by Article 22 -( also within the Treaty of Versailles )
Preamble of the Mandate for ““palestine””
” Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have also agreed that the Mandatory should be responsible for putting into effect
the Declaration originally made on November 2nd 1917 by the Government of His Britannic Majesty , and adopted by the said
Powers , in favour of the establishment in ““palestine”” of a national home for the Jewish people , whereas recognition has thereby
been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with ““palestine”” and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country…’
Article 5 – Great Britain shall be responsible for seeing that no ““palestine”” territory shall be
ceded or leased to or in any way placed under the control of the Government of any foreign power
N.B. Great Britain alone divided the land between West ( Cis ) and Transjordan
and illegally gave the Golan Heights to France for Syria in Article 25 – an illegal , unilateral breach of the Mandate.
Article 6 shall facilitate Jewish immigration and shall encourage settlement by Jews
on State Lands and Wastelands
Anglo American Convention December 3 1924
Codified into US Law all of the above
UN Charter Article 80 – June 1945 –
The UN is required to uphold provisions of all previous League of Nations Treaties
‘ Rights gained through a Mandate will not expire as a result of the expiration of the
Mandate’. Thus the UN under binding International Law is ( was ) required to endorse, uphold , ratify and codify
into International Law the League of Nations Treaty for “palestine” of 1922/3
This principle of Acquired Rights – Once granted are recognized under a Treaty or other instruments do not
expire with the expiration of the Treaty. The additional international legal principle of Estoppel further endorses
in reverse the binding principle of Acquired Rights as it does not permit any party to a legally binding Treaty as the
League of Nations Mandate for “palestine”, from amending , reversing or reneging on any of the Terms of the Treaty.
UN General Assembly Partition Resolution – November 1947 and May 1948
Not legally binding as General Assembly can only make recommendations ( Articles 10 and 14 ) and this would if adopted had
breached the principles of Acquired Rights and Estoppel.
Moreover it was rejected by the Arabs and has always been invalid .
The 1949 Armistice Agreement- the Green Line
‘’The Armistice Demarcation Line is not to be construed in any sense as a political or territorial boundary as per the Israel Egypt Agreement of February 1949.
No provision of this Agreement shall in any way prejudice the rights, claims and positions of either party….. the provisions of this Agreement being dictated exclusively by military considerations.
Thus there is no legal basis for calling the 1949 Armistice Lines the 1967 borders.”
1964 “palestinian” Charter
The PLO does not exercise any regional sovereignty over the West Bank in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan or on the Gaza Strip or the Himmah area (Golan).
South West Africa – Decision on Mandates July 1966
UN Charter upheld
Vienna Convention Article 70 ( 1 ) ( b ) May 1969
The rights of the Jewish People deriving from the Mandate for “palestine” remain in full force. This principle of International Law would still apply even if one of the parties to the Treaty failed to perform the obligations imposed on it e.g .the British Government in regard to the 1922 Mandate for ““palestine”” .
Under the doctrine of Estoppel prohibiting any State from denying what it had previously admitted, committed to or recognised under a former Treaty or any other International Agreement.
The principles of Acquired Legal Rights and Estoppel are codified within this Convention.
The Court of Appeal of Versailles 2013 – in a legal case brought by the Palestinian Authority against the State of Israel regarding a transportation issue, the Court ruled that Israel’s territorial rights under current International law include Judea and Samaria commonly referred to as the West Bank in modern parlance.
We have become used to the media terminology falsely perpetrated by Israel’s enemies, the bigoted and the ignorant, the Dreyfus hate mob as I often refer to them, of Israeli ‘occupied land’ or ‘illegally occupied land’ and the more fashionably used term of the pseudo intellectual left – ‘apartheid.’
Terminology is the most powerful weapon used to delegitimize Israel’s legal rights and is now so commonly used by the ignorant and the enemies of the Jewish State that fiction has morphed into fact. There is an urgency to debunk the myths and clarify the legal situation verifying and legally validating Israel’s claims to Judea and Samaria (the West Bank), and to Gaza, under International Law . All these geographical areas fall within the legal boundaries of the Jewish State of Israel,
Rest assured that whenever you read or hear the adjectives, occupied or illegally occupied by journalists, politicians academics or TV and Radio presenters when referring to the West Bank or Gaza, they, through sheer ignorance or personal bigotry are spreading and facilitating fake news. The term Apartheid, the ultimate verbal offence in their armoury is pure fiction, a lie, a false narrative. Fake news at its most powerful. Apartheid means segregation of the races – the Palestinians are not a race and Israel is a multiracial society where ethnic minorities are treated as equals. There are 400 mosques and numerous churches in Israel and Muslims and Christians serve in Government and the Armed Forces at the highest level. Indeed many Muslims sought, still seek and took refuge in Israel when persecuted by other Muslims such as the Bahia community and Sudanese and Bosnian Muslims too. How many synagogues and Jews in Gaza? None. And one million Jews have been ethnically cleansed from Muslim countries in the last eighty years . The only nations guilty of Apartheid are those nations where Islam is the predominant religion and Jews and Christians persecuted minorities. Even today the Islamic country of Mauritania practices apartheid against its indigenous black African, non Muslim population – this passes unnoticed by the UN. Slavery against indigenous black Africans by Islamic dominated North African countries and atrocities committed against the same victims by the same perpetrators goes unnoticed by the UN and the EU – only the Jewish State of Israel, guilty of neither apartheid nor slavery is however singled out for political and economic sanction….antisemitism is alive and kicking among the political elite.
Under International Law as identified below, the West Bank and Gaza fall within Israel’s borders . The former was occupied by Jordan during the period 1948 to 1967 but won back by Israel during the defensive war of 1967. Thus Jordan for that period were the occupying power. Israel, in order to achieve peace, latterly decided to leave Gaza but nevertheless under International Law, Gaza legally remains part of Israeli sovereign territory. Unsurprisingly as the ‘palestinians’ did not exist during the Jordanian occupation the Jordanians never offered the occupants an independent state of “palestine.” In 1967 the geographical area was liberated from an occupying nation, Jordan, and rightfully returned to the legal possession of the State of Israel.
Unpalatable as this may be to Israel’s enemies and the ignorant, these are the facts. The internationally binding, legal facts.
For those of you without the will to persevere with the legal intricacies, there are basically five, just five main legal factors to consider when challenging those who continue using the false narrative regarding Israel’s ‘occupation’ of ‘palestinian’ territory. Two are established legal Treaties that to this day define the borders of Israel under International Law – the League of Nations Covenant of 1922 which incorporates the Mandate System including the Mandate for “palestine,” and the UN Charter of 1945, specifically Article 80. Both legally binding establishing and endorsing International Law contain, codify, endorse, ratify, verify and validate that the borders of Israel include Judea and Samaria (the West Bank) and Gaza.
The Mandate for “palestine” incorporated within the League of Nations Covenant of 1922 survived the demise of the League itself with the formation of the United Nations whereby Article 80 of the UN Charter recognised the Mandate for “palestine” of the League of Nations. This Mandate granted the Jewish people the irrevocable legal rights to live anywhere between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea – a right that remains unaltered in International Law and cannot be amended. As an aside the International Court of Justice in three separate instances reaffirmed and upheld this principle, in 1950,1971 and 2004 when considering and judging on similar but different cases. Neither the ICJ nor the UN General Assembly can arbitrarily amend the status of any party as defined within the Mandate for “palestine.”
Three other legally binding principles known as Acquired Rights, Estoppel and Uti Possidetis Juris endorse and codify within international law the two documents noted above for time immemorial and it must be reiterated that no UN Resolution has the power to amend, reduce or reconstitute that which has previously been established. It is that simple.
Acquired Rights simply ensures that legal rights once given cannot be taken away and Estoppel establishes that those giving the rights cannot thereafter take those rights away nor amend them. Uti Possidetis Juris simply defines borders of new sovereign states on the basis of their previous administrative frontiers, in this case Israel as the legal documents were originally defined. These five factors legally determine and constitute Israel’s geography and borders and include the Judea/Samaria and Gaza for time immemorial.
Other terminology within the current narrative used to delegitimize Israel’s rightful legal claims over all the territory supposedly under illegal Israeli control is that –
1. Israel is in breach of UN resolution 181 of the 1947 Partition Plan, 2. The Hague Regulations of 1907 and 3. The Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949. Again these can easily be debunked and effectively discredited as they have no direct application or relevance to the legal status or to any of the geography under Israel’s legal control, including any ‘settlements’ or the “West Bank” or indeed Gaza if Israel wished to retake control. Firstly UN Resolution 181 was rejected by the Arabs and thus never implemented and is now an irrelevance. Regarding the Hague Regulations and the Geneva Convention, while both are genuine codes within International Law, paradoxically and perversely they would only apply to any Arab
(palestinian) occupation of Israeli territory such as that which occurred during the 1948 -1967 period of Jordanian control. The Hague Regulations are designed to protect the interests of a temporarily ousted sovereign in the context of an occupation – the palestinians have never been a sovereign and even if they were the previous legally binding documents and principles would dismiss such claims. The Geneva Convention often used to delegitimise Israel’s rights, refer to a sovereign forcibly transferring its civilian population into those occupied territories. Israel has never forcibly transferred any of its civilians to any territory. The attempts to use UN Resolution 181, the Hague Regulations and the Geneva Convention to support palestinian claims are utterly absurd and though seemingly impressive when used by Israel’s enemies in debate, all as explained are irrelevant. However, even if they were relevant, the established principles and legally binding Treaties referred to above take precedence.
In summary and as with Part 1 of the Palestinian Fairy Tale, this Part 2 deals with the false narrative that has morphed into facts relating to the legal aspects of the conflict. It’s time we put the record straight and challenged the fake news used solely to delegitimize the Jewish State’s right to its legally defined geography.
Unsurprisingly any nation calling for “palestinian” Statehood would be contravening the United Nations International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms Of Racial Discrimination. General Assembly Resolution 2106 dated December 21 1965, directly negate the racist Palestinian Charters of the Palestinian Authority (the former dated 1964 , updated 1968) and the Palestinian Hamas Charter of 1988 which replicate the manifestos of Nazi Germany in numerous articles embedded within both Charters.
Demanding both the elimination of Israel, Jew extermination and the subservience to Islam of all other races and religions, both Charters directly breach, contravene and indeed mock Resolution 2106. The Palestinian Hamas Charter underlines still further the moral indecency of palestinian demands in Article 17 in which it specifically states that various charitable organisations currently assisting all those, for example who are the world’s sickest , poorest and underprivileged , those who are terminally ill, the mentally and physically disabled, abused children and so on, are exterminated. If you don’t believe me then read the Charters of the Palestinians. Nauseating is an understatement – how can any morally decent diplomat representing their nationals support Islamic Nazism? Each and every individual who has been conned into supporting the palestinian cause should first and foremost understand their morally indecent Charters just so those individuals can satisfy themselves on the Nazi equivalent manifestos they are supporting.
Both Charters below sink to the deepest levels of human depravity consistent with the aims and objectives of the most barbaric since the beginning of time. To know that there are those in this world, supporting such depraved objectives in order to achieve palestinian nation state status is truly beyond comprehension and those racists supporting the palestinian ’cause’ as per the Charters below should be ashamed, re-educated and exposed.
And these Charters have formed the bedrock of the palestinian education system – three generations of children inundated with Jew hatred and racist ideology.
Given the number of qualified, pro Israeli academics, politicians both globally and within Israel, and eminent pro Israeli lawyers, who far more eloquently than I could debate the issues raised here – why oh why are they silent? In all my years as a researcher and activist when these issues are raised , I have never encountered any challenge that changes the facts as described above. I have encountered rabid hostility and a lack of intellectual debate but never anything that remotely comes close to negating anything I have written and believe to be the legal status as of today and for time immemorial.
But perhaps even truth eventually morphs into the truth instead of maintenance of lies, fiction and fake news will it make any difference.
Even if I am wrong in my challenges and understanding surely by just reviewing a map of the area exposes not Jewish – Israeli – Zionist colonialism but Islamic expansionism and colonialism similar to the Middle Ages and the Christian Crusades or the objectives of Nazi Germany and the colonialist success of the post war Soviet Union. Jewish expansionism, if that was and it was not the objective as per the map below has been a total failure .
And this is where the writings of the Arab academic and historian Joseph Farah ring so true. In his Myths Of The Middle East he pens the following…….
”There has never been a land known as “palestine” governed by palestinians. Palestinians are Arabs, indistinguishable from Jordanians, another recent invention, Syrians, Iraqis, etc. Keep in mind that the Arabs control 99.9 percent of the Middle East lands. Israel represents one tenth of one percent of the landmass . But that’s too much for the Arabs. They want it all. And that is ultimately what the fighting in Israel is about today. No matter how many land concessions the Israelis make, it will never be enough.”
–The legal timeline – only for academic support of the paragraphs above.
Balfour Declaration November 2 1917: A statement of intent of British Foreign Policy – ‘‘Viewed with favour the establishment of a Jewish National Home in ““palestine”.”
This policy became part of International Law when it was included in the San Remo Resolution (adopted April 25th 1920 by the Supreme Council of the Allied Powers) which was itself incorporated into Article 22 of the 1919 League of Nations Covenant
from which the nations of Syria, Lebanon and Iraq emerged. The San Remo document was further incorporated within the Treaty of Sevres and remained unchanged in the ratified Treaty of Lausanne of 1923.
Faisal – Weizmann Agreement for Arab – Jewish Cooperation January 1919
‘’We Arabs …. look with the deepest sympathy on the Zionist movement…. we will wish the Jews a most hearty welcome home . I and my people look forward to a future in which we will help you and you will help us so that the countries in which we are mutually interested may once again take their places in the community of the civilised peoples of the world.” — Smuts Resolution, January 1919
Jan Christian Smuts formulated the details in a memorandum which became known as the Smuts Resolution. Officially endorsed by the Council of 10 on January 30 1919 – “palestine” as envisaged by the Balfour Declaration, named as a Mandated State. Became Article 22 of The League of Nations Covenant which governed and established the Mandates System.Also incorporated within the Treaty of Versailles and other peace treaties made with Germany, Austria-Hungary, Bulgaria and Turkey after WW1.
–Paris Peace Conference February 1919: In which the Mandate for “palestine” was reviewed for inclusion within the League of Nations Covenants and where the Council of Ten endorsed the development of “palestine” into a Jewish Commonwealth with extensive boundaries.
–Treaty of Versailles June 1919: The League of Nations Covenant which itself created the Mandate System forms the preamble of the Peace Treaty of Versailles.
–San Remo Resolution April 1920: The Magna Carta of the Jewish people , it became Article 95 of the Treaty of Sevres and retained its validity as an act of
International Law when inserted into the Preamble of the Mandate for “palestine” by 52 States of the League of Nations.
— Article 22 of the L of N Covenant also implemented the Mandate for “palestine,” the Balfour Declaration and the San Remo Resolution.
The Mandate has 58 Articles and is the official Legal creation of Israel/“palestine” adopted by the 52 States and by the Supreme Council of the Principal Allied Powers. Under this Resolution the Principal Allied Powers charged the British Government with the responsibility and legal obligation of putting into effect the Balfour Declaration and the borders of Israel / “palestine” including Cis and TransJordan. It combined Article 22 of the League of Nations with the Balfour Declaration . Arab National aspirations recognised too – Saudi Arabia / Hijaz 1931,
Iraq (Mesopotamia) 1932, Lebanon 1943 and Syria -under French Mandate 1946.
–Treaty of Sevres, Article 95 , August 10 1920
The San Remo Resolution became Article 95 of The treaty of Sevres which was itself inserted into the Preamble of The Mandate For “palestine” thus becoming an act of International Law when confirmed by the League of Nations.
–Franco British Boundary Convention – December 23 1920
Identified and confirmed all borders of “palestine” from Dan to Beersheba . In other words the borders of present day Israel would embrace the geographical historical areas settled by the twelve tribes of Israel both East and West of the Jordan River.
Agreed by David Lloyd George and Georges Clemenceau defined “palestine” as from Dan to Beersheba and also included Trans-Jordan, Saudi, Mesopotamia, Syria.
–The Mandate for “palestine” – July 22,1922: This included and implemented both the Balfour Declaration and the League of Nations Covenant Article 22 which itself included and incorporated the San Remo Resolution.
As Howard Grief, the internationally acclaimed expert penned –
‘‘All of these were building blocks in the legal structure that was created for the purpose of bringing about the establishment of an independent Jewish State. The Balfour Declaration stated the principle or object of a Jewish State. The San Remo Resolution gave it the stamp of International Law . The Mandate furnished all the details and means for the realisation of the Jewish State.”
–The idea of an Internationally binding Legal Covenant was the idea of US President, Woodrow Wilson containing his 14 points of January 8 1918.
–Mandate system established and governed by Article 22 – (also within the Treaty of Versailles)
Preamble of the Mandate for ““palestine””
” Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have also agreed that the Mandatory should be responsible for putting into effect
the Declaration originally made on November 2nd 1917 by the Government of His Britannic Majesty , and adopted by the said
Powers , in favour of the establishment in ““palestine”” of a national home for the Jewish people , whereas recognition has thereby
been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with ““palestine”” and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country…’
Article 5 – Great Britain shall be responsible for seeing that no ““palestine”” territory shall be
ceded or leased to or in any way placed under the control of the Government of any foreign power
N.B. Great Britain alone divided the land between West ( Cis ) and Transjordan
and illegally gave the Golan Heights to France for Syria in Article 25 – an illegal , unilateral breach of the Mandate.
Article 6 shall facilitate Jewish immigration and shall encourage settlement by Jews
on State Lands and Wastelands
Anglo American Convention December 3 1924
Codified into US Law all of the above
UN Charter Article 80 – June 1945 –
The UN is required to uphold provisions of all previous League of Nations Treaties
‘ Rights gained through a Mandate will not expire as a result of the expiration of the
Mandate’. Thus the UN under binding International Law is ( was ) required to endorse, uphold , ratify and codify
into International Law the League of Nations Treaty for “palestine” of 1922/3
This principle of Acquired Rights – Once granted are recognized under a Treaty or other instruments do not
expire with the expiration of the Treaty. The additional international legal principle of Estoppel further endorses
in reverse the binding principle of Acquired Rights as it does not permit any party to a legally binding Treaty as the
League of Nations Mandate for “palestine”, from amending , reversing or reneging on any of the Terms of the Treaty.
UN General Assembly Partition Resolution – November 1947 and May 1948
Not legally binding as General Assembly can only make recommendations ( Articles 10 and 14 ) and this would if adopted had
breached the principles of Acquired Rights and Estoppel.
Moreover it was rejected by the Arabs and has always been invalid .
The 1949 Armistice Agreement- the Green Line
‘’The Armistice Demarcation Line is not to be construed in any sense as a political or territorial boundary as per the Israel Egypt Agreement of February 1949.
No provision of this Agreement shall in any way prejudice the rights, claims and positions of either party….. the provisions of this Agreement being dictated exclusively by military considerations.
Thus there is no legal basis for calling the 1949 Armistice Lines the 1967 borders.”
1964 “palestinian” Charter
The PLO does not exercise any regional sovereignty over the West Bank in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan or on the Gaza Strip or the Himmah area (Golan).
South West Africa – Decision on Mandates July 1966
UN Charter upheld
Vienna Convention Article 70 ( 1 ) ( b ) May 1969
The rights of the Jewish People deriving from the Mandate for “palestine” remain in full force. This principle of International Law would still apply even if one of the parties to the Treaty failed to perform the obligations imposed on it e.g .the British Government in regard to the 1922 Mandate for ““palestine”” .
Under the doctrine of Estoppel prohibiting any State from denying what it had previously admitted, committed to or recognised under a former Treaty or any other International Agreement.
The principles of Acquired Legal Rights and Estoppel are codified within this Convention.
The Court of Appeal of Versailles 2013 – in a legal case brought by the Palestinian Authority against the State
of Israel regarding a transportation issue, the Court ruled that Israel’s territorial rights under current International law
include Judea and Samaria commonly referred to as the West Bank in modern parlance.
The Palestinian Refugees
to land they claim should form part of a Palestinian State.
We have become used to the media terminology falsely perpetrated by Israel’s enemies, the bigoted and the ignorant, the Dreyfus hate mob as I often refer to them , of Israeli ‘ occupied land ‘ or ‘ illegally occupied land ‘ and the more fashionably used term of the pseudo intellectual left – ‘ apartheid ‘ .
Terminology is the most powerful weapon used to delegitimize Israel’s legal rights and is now so commonly used by the ignorant
and the enemies of the Jewish State that fiction has morphed into fact. There is an urgency to debunk the myths and clarify the legal situation verifying and legally validating Israel’s claims to Judea and Samaria – the West Bank , and to Gaza , under International Law . All these geographical areas fall within the legal boundaries of the Jewish State of Israel,
Rest assured that whenever you read or hear the adjectives, occupied or illegally occupied by journalists, politicians academics or TV and Radio presenters when referring to the West Bank or Gaza, they, through sheer ignorance or personal bigotry are spreading and facilitating fake news. The term Apartheid , the ultimate verbal offence in their armoury is pure fiction , a lie , a false narrative . Fake news at its most powerful . Apartheid means segregation of the races – the Palestinians are not a race and Israel is a multiracial society where ethnic minorities are treated as equals. There are 400 mosques and numerous churches in Israel and Muslims and Christians serve in Government and the Armed Forces at the highest level. Indeed many Muslims sought, still seek and took refuge in Israel when persecuted by other Muslims such as the Bahia community and Sudanese and Bosnian Muslims too . How many synagogues and Jews in Gaza ? None. And one million Jews have been ethnically cleansed from Muslim countries in the last eighty years . The only nations guilty of Apartheid are those nations where Islam is the predominant religion and Jews and Christians persecuted minorities. Even today the Islamic country of Mauritania practices apartheid against its indigenous black African, non Muslim population – this passes unnoticed by the UN . Slavery against indigenous black Africans by Islamic dominated North African countries and atrocities committed against the same victims by the same perpetrators goes unnoticed by the UN and the EU – only the Jewish State of Israel , guilty of neither apartheid nor slavery is however singled out for political and economic sanction….antisemitism is alive and kicking among the political elite.
Under International Law as identified below, the West Bank and Gaza fall within Israel’s borders . The former was occupied by Jordan during the period 1948 to 1967 but won back by Israel during the defensive war of 1967. Thus Jordan for that period were the occupying power. Israel, in order to achieve peace, latterly decided to leave Gaza but nevertheless under International Law , Gaza legally remains part of Israeli sovereign territory. Unsurprisingly as the ‘ Palestinians ‘ did not exist during the Jordanian occupation the Jordanians never offered the occupants an independent state of ““palestine””. In 1967 the geographical area was liberated from an occupying nation, Jordan, and rightfully returned to the legal possession of the State of Israel.
Unpalatable as this may be to Israel’s enemies and the ignorant, these are the facts. The internationally binding, legal facts.
For those of you without the will to persevere with the legal intricacies , there are basically five, just five main legal factors to
consider when challenging those who continue using the false narrative regarding Israel’s ‘ occupation ‘ of ‘Palestinian’ territory.
Two are established legal Treaties that to this day define the borders of Israel under International Law – the League of Nations Covenant of 1922 which incorporates the Mandate System including the Mandate for ““palestine””, and the UN Charter of 1945 specifically Article 80 . Both legally binding establishing and endorsing International Law contain, codify, endorse, ratify, verify and validate that the borders of Israel include Judea and Samaria ( the West Bank ) and Gaza.
The Mandate for ““palestine”” incorporated within the League of Nations Covenant of 1922 survived the demise of the League itself with the formation of the United Nations whereby Article 80 of the UN Charter recognised the Mandate for ““palestine”” of the League of Nations. This Mandate granted the Jewish people the irrevocable legal rights to live anywhere between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea – a right that remains unaltered in International Law and cannot be amended. As an aside the International Court of Justice in three separate instances reaffirmed and upheld this principle, in 1950 ,1971 and 2004 when considering and judging on similar but different cases. Neither the ICJ nor the UN General Assembly can arbitrarily amend the status of any party as defined within the Mandate for ““palestine””.
Three other legally binding principles known as Acquired Rights , Estoppel and Uti Possidetis Juris endorse and codify within international law the two documents noted above for time immemorial and it must be reiterated that no UN Resolution has the power to amend , reduce or reconstitute that which has previously been established. It is that simple.
Acquired Rights simply ensures that legal rights once given cannot be taken away and Estoppel establishes that those giving the rights cannot thereafter take those rights away nor amend them . Uti Possidetis Juris simply defines borders of new sovereign states on the basis of their previous administrative frontiers , in this case Israel as the legal documents were originally defined. These five factors legally determine and constitute Israel’s geography and borders and include the West Bank and Gaza for time immemorial.
Other terminology within the current narrative used to delegitimise Israel’s rightful legal claims over all the territory supposedly under illegal Israeli control is that –
1. Israel is in breach of UN resolution 181 of the 1947 Partition Plan , 2. The Hague Regulations of 1907 and 3. The Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949. Again these can easily be debunked and effectively discredited as they have no direct application or relevance to the legal status or to any of the geography under Israel’s legal control , including any ‘ settlements ‘ or the West Bank or indeed Gaza if Israel wished to retake control . Firstly UN Resolution 181 was rejected by the Arabs and thus never implemented and is now an irrelevance. Regarding the Hague Regulations and the Geneva Convention , while both are genuine codes within International Law, paradoxically and perversely they would only apply to any Arab ( Palestinian ) occupation of Israeli territory such as that which occurred during the 1948 -1967 period of Jordanian control. The Hague Regulations are designed to protect the interests of a temporarily ousted sovereign in the context of an occupation – the Palestinians have never been a sovereign and even if they were the previous legally binding documents and principles would dismiss such claims. The Geneva Convention often used to delegitimise Israel’s rights, refer to a sovereign forcibly transferring its civilian population into those occupied territories. Israel has never forcibly transferred any of its civilians to any territory . The attempts to use UN Resolution 181, the Hague Regulations and the Geneva Convention to support Palestinian claims are utterly absurd and though seemingly impressive when used by Israel’s enemies in debate, all as explained are irrelevant. However, even if they were relevant, the established principles and legally binding Treaties referred to above take precedence.
In summary and as with Part 1 of the Palestinian Fairy Tale , this Part 2 deals with the false narrative that has morphed into facts relating to the legal aspects of the conflict. It’s time we put the record straight and challenged the fake news used solely to delegitimise
the Jewish State’s right to its legally defined geography.
Unsurprisingly any nation calling for ‘ Palestinian ‘ Statehood would be contravening the United Nations International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms Of Racial Discrimination. General Assembly Resolution 2106 dated December 21 1965 , directly negate the racist Palestinian Charters of the Palestinian Authority ( the former dated 1964 , updated 1968 ) and the Palestinian Hamas Charter of 1988 which replicate the manifestos of Nazi Germany in numerous articles embedded within both Charters.
Demanding both the elimination of Israel, Jew extermination and the subservience to Islam of all other races and religions , both Charters directly breach, contravene and indeed mock Resolution 2106. The Palestinian Hamas Charter underlines still further the moral indecency of Palestinian demands in Article 17 in which it specifically states that various charitable organisations currently assisting all those, for example who are the world’s sickest , poorest and underprivileged , those who are terminally ill , the mentally and physically disabled , abused children and so on, are exterminated. If you don’t believe me then read the Charters of the Palestinians. Nauseating is an understatement – how can any morally decent diplomat representing their nationals support Islamic Nazism ? Each and every individual who has been conned into supporting the Palestinian cause should first and foremost understand their morally indecent Charters just so those individuals can satisfy themselves on the Nazi equivalent manifestos they are supporting.
Both Charters below sink to the deepest levels of human depravity consistent with the aims and objectives of the most barbaric since the beginning of time. To know that there are those in this world, supporting such depraved objectives in order to achieve Palestinian Nation State status is truly beyond comprehension and those racists supporting the Palestinian ‘ cause ‘ as per the Charters below should be ashamed , re-educated and exposed.
And these Charters have formed the bedrock of the Palestinian education system – three generations of children inundated with Jew hatred and racist ideology.
Given the number of qualified , pro Israeli academics, politicians both globally and within Israel, and eminent pro Israeli lawyers , who far more eloquently than I could debate the issues raised here – why oh why are they silent? In all my years as a researcher and activist when these issues are raised , I have never encountered any challenge that changes the facts as described above. I have encountered rabid hostility and a lack of intellectual debate but never anything that remotely comes close to negating anything I have written and believe to be the legal status as of today and for time immemorial.
But perhaps even truth eventually morphs into the truth instead of maintenance of lies, fiction and fake news will it make any difference.
Even if I am wrong in my challenges and understanding surely by just reviewing a map of the area exposes not Jewish – Israeli – Zionist colonialism but Islamic expansionism and colonialism similar to the Middle Ages and the Christian Crusades or the objectives of Nazi Germany and the colonialist success of the post war Soviet Union. Jewish expansionism , if that was and it was not the objective as per the map below has been a total failure .
And this is where the writings of the Arab academic and historian Joseph Farah ring so true. In his ” Myths Of The Middle East ” he pens the following…….
” There has never been a land known as ““palestine”” governed by Palestinians . Palestinians are Arabs , indistinguishable from Jordanians, another recent invention, Syrians, Iraqis, etc. Keep in mind that the Arabs control 99.9 percent of the Middle East lands. Israel represents one tenth of one percent of the landmass . But that’s too much for the Arabs. They want it all . And that is ultimately what the fighting in Israel is about today. No matter how many land concessions the Israelis make, it will never be enough ”.
The legal timeline – only for academic support of the paragraphs above.
Balfour Declaration November 2 1917
A statement of intent of British Foreign Policy – ” Viewed with favour the establishment of a Jewish National Home in ““palestine””.
This policy became part of International Law when it was included in the San Remo Resolution ( adopted April 25th 1920 by the
Supreme Council of the Allied Powers ) which was itself incorporated into Article 22 of the 1919 League of Nations Covenant
from which the nations of Syria , Lebanon and Iraq emerged.
The San Remo document was further incorporated within the Treaty of Sevres and remained unchanged in the ratified Treaty of Lausanne of 1923.
Faisal – Weizmann Agreement for Arab – Jewish Cooperation January 1919
‘’ We Arabs …. look with the deepest sympathy on the Zionist movement…. we will wish the Jews a most hearty welcome home . I and my people look forward to a future in which we will help you and you will help us so that the countries in which we are mutually interested may once again take their places in the community of the civilised peoples of the world’’
Smuts Resolution, January 1919
Jan Christian Smuts formulated the details in a memorandum which became known as the Smuts Resolution.
Officially endorsed by the Council of 10 on January 30 1919 – ““palestine”” as envisaged by the Balfour Declaration
named as a Mandated State .
Became Article 22 of The League of Nations Covenant which governed and established the Mandates System.
Also incorporated within the Treaty of Versailles and other peace treaties made with Germany, Austria-Hungary ,
Bulgaria and Turkey after WW1.
Paris Peace Conference February 1919
In which the Mandate for ““palestine”” was reviewed for inclusion within the League of Nations Covenants and where the Council of Ten
endorsed the development of ““palestine”” into a Jewish Commonwealth with extensive boundaries.
Treaty of Versailles June 1919
The League of Nations Covenant which itself created the Mandate System forms the preamble of the Peace Treaty of Versailles.
San Remo Resolution April 1920
The Magna Carta of the Jewish people , it became Article 95 of the Treaty of Sevres and retained its validity as an act of
International Law when inserted into the Preamble of the Mandate for ““palestine”” by 52 States of the League of Nations .
Article 22 of the L of N Covenant also implemented the Mandate for ““palestine””, the Balfour Declaration and the San Remo Resolution.
The Mandate has 58 Articles and is the official Legal creation of Israel / ““palestine”” adopted by the 52 States and
by the Supreme Council of the Principal Allied Powers
Under this Resolution the Principal Allied Powers charged the British Government with the responsibility and legal obligation of putting into effect the Balfour Declaration and the borders of Israel / ““palestine”” including Cis and TransJordan.
It combined Article 22 of the League of Nations with the Balfour Declaration .
Arab National aspirations recognised too –
Saudi Arabia / Hijaz 1931
Iraq (Mesopotamia ) 1932
Lebanon 1943 and Syria -under French Mandate 1946
Treaty of Sevres, Article 95 , August 10 1920
The San Remo Resolution became Article 95 of The treaty of Sevres which was itself inserted into the Preamble of The Mandate For ““palestine”” thus becoming an act of International Law when confirmed by the League of Nations
Franco British Boundary Convention – December 23 1920
Identified and confirmed all borders of ““palestine”” from Dan to Beersheba . In other words the borders of present day Israel would embrace the geographical historical areas settled by the twelve tribes of Israel both East and West of the Jordan River.
Agreed by David Lloyd George and Georges Clemenceau defined ““palestine”” as from
Dan to Beersheba and also included Trans-Jordan , Saudi, Mesopotamia, Syria
The Mandate for ““palestine”” – July 22 ,1922
This included and implemented both the Balfour Declaration and the League of Nations Covenant Article 22 which itself included and incorporated the San Remo Resolution .
As Howard Grief, the internationally acclaimed expert penned –
” All of these were building blocks in the legal structure that was created for the purpose of bringing about the establishment of an independent Jewish State. The Balfour Declaration stated the principle or object of a Jewish State. The San Remo Resolution gave it the stamp of International Law . The Mandate furnished all the details and means for the realisation of the Jewish State ”.
The idea of an Internationally binding Legal Covenant was the idea of US President, Woodrew Wilson containing his 14 points of January 8 1918.
Mandate system established and governed by Article 22 -( also within the Treaty of Versailles )
Preamble of the Mandate for ““palestine””
” Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have also agreed that the Mandatory should be responsible for putting into effect
the Declaration originally made on November 2nd 1917 by the Government of His Britannic Majesty , and adopted by the said
Powers , in favour of the establishment in ““palestine”” of a national home for the Jewish people , whereas recognition has thereby
been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with ““palestine”” and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country…’
Article 5 – Great Britain shall be responsible for seeing that no ““palestine”” territory shall be
ceded or leased to or in any way placed under the control of the Government of any foreign power
N.B. Great Britain alone divided the land between West ( Cis ) and Transjordan
and illegally gave the Golan Heights to France for Syria in Article 25 – an illegal , unilateral breach of the Mandate.
Article 6 shall facilitate Jewish immigration and shall encourage settlement by Jews
on State Lands and Wastelands
Anglo American Convention December 3 1924
Codified into US Law all of the above
UN Charter Article 80 – June 1945 –
The UN is required to uphold provisions of all previous League of Nations Treaties
‘ Rights gained through a Mandate will not expire as a result of the expiration of the
Mandate’. Thus the UN under binding International Law is ( was ) required to endorse, uphold , ratify and codify
into International Law the League of Nations Treaty for “palestine” of 1922/3
This principle of Acquired Rights – Once granted are recognized under a Treaty or other instruments do not
expire with the expiration of the Treaty. The additional international legal principle of Estoppel further endorses
in reverse the binding principle of Acquired Rights as it does not permit any party to a legally binding Treaty as the
League of Nations Mandate for “palestine”, from amending , reversing or reneging on any of the Terms of the Treaty.
UN General Assembly Partition Resolution – November 1947 and May 1948
Not legally binding as General Assembly can only make recommendations ( Articles 10 and 14 ) and this would if adopted had
breached the principles of Acquired Rights and Estoppel.
Moreover it was rejected by the Arabs and has always been invalid .
The 1949 Armistice Agreement- the Green Line
‘’The Armistice Demarcation Line is not to be construed in any sense as a political or territorial boundary as per the Israel Egypt Agreement of February 1949.
No provision of this Agreement shall in any way prejudice the rights, claims and positions of either party….. the provisions of this Agreement being dictated exclusively by military considerations.
Thus there is no legal basis for calling the 1949 Armistice Lines the 1967 borders.”
1964 “palestinian” Charter
The PLO does not exercise any regional sovereignty over the West Bank in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan or on the Gaza Strip or the Himmah area (Golan).
South West Africa – Decision on Mandates July 1966
UN Charter upheld
Vienna Convention Article 70 ( 1 ) ( b ) May 1969
The rights of the Jewish People deriving from the Mandate for “palestine” remain in full force. This principle of International Law would still apply even if one of the parties to the Treaty failed to perform the obligations imposed on it e.g .the British Government in regard to the 1922 Mandate for ““palestine”” .
Under the doctrine of Estoppel prohibiting any State from denying what it had previously admitted, committed to or recognised under a former Treaty or any other International Agreement.
The principles of Acquired Legal Rights and Estoppel are codified within this Convention.
The Court of Appeal of Versailles 2013 – in a legal case brought by the Palestinian Authority against the State
of Israel regarding a transportation issue, the Court ruled that Israel’s territorial rights under current International law
include Judea and Samaria commonly referred to as the West Bank in modern parlance.
The Palestinian Refugees
