Stipulation For Installment Settlement: Fill & Download for Free

This question, the alternate reality of which would entail deep and far-reaching implications, cannot be answered briefly. I apologize up front for the necessary length of this answer.Simply put, not much would have to have changed—the world was full of monarchies; monarchy was in fact the norm at that time. It would seem natural to everyone had the Founders created an American monarchy, even to the Americans. So a better question might be why didn’t the Founders establish an American monarchy? But I’ll answer the question as asked: what would have been required for America to have been established as a momarchy rather than a represented republic?Technically, very little. Words.Practically, however, a great deal would need have happened differently.When the US gained her independence, breaking away was a rare thing, but not never heard of, and standing on centuries of tradition, anyone would have said, ‘Well, George Washington has done the deed of kings: he has led his army in victory against the King’ (tiny English lesson: lower-case k is used when speaking about any old king, upper-case K is used when speaking about a particular king). Washington himself led some battles like the olden English kings did. He defeated the forces of the King. The King is dead; long live the King and all. It would have been accepted around the world for George W to have been named King George I of the Realm of America. Most Americans would have gladly had Washington as the first King. Remember, only about a third of all the American colonists actually supported independence* from their then-King, George III.But the Founders had a different idea, a unique establishment in all the world. They saw a world without kings. Or at least without an American one.And so it was that George Washington was the first elected President in the history of the world. (During the Senate debate to give a title to the chief executive in the Constitution, Senators proposed everything from “His Excellency, the President”, “His Exalted Highness” to “His Majesty”. One Senator found the discussion so silly he shouted out “Why not just call him George IV?”)That hullabaloo resulted from the Senate being at somewhat of a loss—this had never been done before, so there wasn’t a comparable example. What do you call the head of the government if not ‘king’? The Founders compiled the US government’s structure by cherrypicking from numerous foreign examples, including Britain, from whose king we wanted freedom. From Rome, the Senate. From our erstwhile homeland, the House (of Representatives here, Commons there). The chief executive in every other example was a king, queen, emperor or empress. There was no elected executive charged with serving his people and with limited powers. But the Founders had decided on a bicameral legislative assembly of both elected and appointed** civil servants, and they had decided, from their experiences as English subjects, that while good and fair, a parliamentary government wasn’t very strong if a monarch could arbitrarily override their work. So it was decided to institute a new thing—an elected ‘king’ whose powers were very limited, and whose acts could be overturned by a sufficient number of legislators, who could in fact be removed from office for cause.In traditional European monarchies, the King owned the military, whose sworn allegiance was to the King personally—the pen might be mightier than the sword, but if the other guy has a sword, you better too. This was another very sticky point for the Founders—they abhorred a standing military, because its primary peacetime function was oppressing the King’s subjects to one degree or another. The Founders gave the military to the people of the United States, and gave Congress sole authority to declare war. But the new ‘boss’ was also given the title Commander in Chief of the military. Thus the new nation’s ‘leader’ was from the start a co-player with Congress in the use of military power.The funds of kingdoms traditionally belonged to the king personally, and later, sizeable discretionary funds did if not the whole of the treasures. He alone decided where the big bucks went. He had bean counters to handle the mundane of course, but the big, international stuff, he wrote the check himself. The king could use his purse strings as another weapon in his arsenal to control his subjects. The Founders didn’t want to create a similar bludgeon by giving the chief executive control over the money, which kings traditionally raised through fiat taxation with their troops often accompanying or acting as tax collectors. So the Constitution includes language granting Congress the authority to raise funds, and the kinds of things Congress could fund with taxes, such as an Army and Navy. The Founders also made caveats that only the House of Representatives could propose spending, keeping the purse away from the quasi-royalty, the appointed (originally) Senate, and rendered the chief executive little more than a petitioner for spending before Congress.There are numerous other things which the Colonists were aggrieved over, but most of them were smaller issues to the Founders when considering the things they felt needed to be written to prevent a monarchy from arising here. A great many wrongs can be visited upon the people in the name of a king, but first there must be a king. The Founders knew that abuse of power is almost a given, if one has total power. Yes, the King of England had to deal with his Parliament, but the lack of a written constitution in many instances allowed the King to throw his weight around in a broad swath of issues. Including using his military to secure new territories or to control existing ones. The Founders feared creating a traditional monarchy because they feared Congress ultimately could not control or limit a king.So given the Founders’ grievances against the King of England, why would they have wanted the new nation to have been established as a kingdom? One reason: familiarity. Kings were all the world, and indeed the American colonists, had ever known. So it would have been tempting to just say, “Well, by Jove, our Kingdom will be benign” and attempt to create a benign crown.Say they had chosen to encode monarchy instead of elected representation. In the face of the grievances they had with their then-current King of England, to break away and form their own kingdom would have required a different set of circumstances. Let’s be frank—a lot of the grief the Colonists rebelled against was ginned up. A lot of the outrage was fomented by a radical press (where have you heard that before?), and a rather large handful of angry men who had the gift of gab, the power of persuasion. But a lot was real—the King’s Army did throw people out of their homes and use them as barracks for the troops. To the King, everything in his realm belonged to him, including every house, farm, and business. So he saw no wrong in his troops sleeping in your house. The Colonists had a concept of personal property and privacy so strong it became the 3rd and 4th Amendments to the Constitution. How would that fit into a monarchy? I hope you see that, so shot through with hatred of the King and his actions as the effort to break away was, very early on significant changes to reality would have need occurred for the rebels to choose the same type of government they fought to be rid of. Like what?Well, I think we can only answer that by looking closely at the Declaration of Independence. A great many common, everyday Americans mistakenly believe the DoI is part of or on equal standing with the Constitution. This is because good, basic civics and government classes are no longer taught in most elementary and secondary schools and this is because the John Dewey educational model stresses government control of the children instead of parental control. Want a nation of sheep? Don’t teach them that the sheep are supposed to be in the government, thrall to the will of the people and the rule of law. Teach them that government, not parents, is supposed to form young minds. Teach them government is supreme, and they will be meekly subservient to it. This is 180 degrees away from original intent, which was based on, among other things, the laundry list of no-no’s the Colonies outlined in the DoI. As recently as the mid-60’s, though, some teachers were still trying to actually teach real civics in some districts. My 5th-grade “Social Studies” teacher gave everyone a parchment reproduction of the Constitution and the DoI. It’s a ‘Dear John’ or rather, a ‘Dear George’ letter. We don’t love you any more. Why? Because you’ve done these things and we are not going to tolerate it any longer.We have to consider, what about the world of 1765 would have to be different for a) the Colonists to still revolt against the King, but b) want to create an American monarchy in its place. We have to cherrypick our grievances and craft a monarchy from the the bones. We need to stipulate that some things had to remain the same to foment rebellion against the King of England, but others need to happen differently so that having thrown him out, America’s founders would still choose to establish a king here. Thus we need to rewrite some documents and change some events.So to the original ‘bitch list’ we go:“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” Right off the get, we see the Founders had a big problem with a traditional cornerstone of monarchy: assumed superiority. As in, kings believed they were superior persons to, and, by their (imagined) Divine Right of Kings, ought be emplaced above the common man—even extending to the marital bed. This most famous sentence could only have been received by the King as a slap in the face, the flat statement that no king is better than any man, and that each man and not the king determines his station and destiny. This is the opening sentence to the Declaration of Independence, but I would hazard a guess that over half of Americans think it is part of the Constitution.“That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.” Okay, here’s another dig at monarchies. We free Men will form our own governments, and the government shall not exercise power without consent. Well, exercising power without consent is called many things: abuse of power, tyranny…monarchy. King. There’s a reason that fairy tales are full of benevolent, kind kings: that’s about the only place they’re found.“Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.”So far, this has just been the pre-game warm-up here. But the Ace is on the mound now and here come the fastballs.“He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.” This means the King would not approve locally-written law or even Parliamentary laws if he felt like ignoring them. Essentially, the King could just ignore any law he didn’t like and in effect issue a pocket veto.“He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.” So the King owned the courts as well.“He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.” And the Army.“He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power.” Yep, the King owned the Army, and placed it above reproach of the colonists. In fact, the Colonists had a real problem with a King’s army and the way he used it.“For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us;“For protecting them, by a mock Trial from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States.” This is why the Founders allotted the military to Congress. The military should not be at the beck and call of the king, but to Congress and the chief executive. Points to the Founders for calling them “States” and not colonies. As though American victory is a forgone conclusion.“…For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent.” This is one of the biggest reasons the Colonists revolted—fiat taxation.“For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies.” Yes, the Founders were criticizing the King’s policies and actions in Canada (Quebec), because the same policies and actions were being adopted in America. The Founders saw a shrinking of the citizen’s station within the Realm to nothing more than a revenue source with no voice and no rights.“He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.” The King arbitrarily decided his American colony was simply too distant to protect, but not too far away to plunder and sack. So the King was duplicitous and disengenuous, and by sending troops to control crowds, also oppressive (there were several small skirmishes which resulted in deaths of Colonists, notably the Boston Massacre) and violent toward his subjects, who only desired humane and reasonable treatment at the hands of their king.“He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.” This grievance addressed the Founders’ outrage at being so dastardly treated by their own government—cruelties that resulted from the King’s flippant and dismissive attitude toward the American colonies, and his utter disdain for the colonists’ legitimate gripes about the aforementioned injustices.“He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.” In other words, piracy on the high seas. Piracy was actually a tool of monarchies in their wars against each other. Edward Teach—the dread pirate Blackbeard—was actually a privateer: a pirate-for-hire during the Spanish Succession; afterwards, he turned against England and went rogue. The English killed him for his troubles. But who was his boss? Queen Anne of England. George III’s monarchy practiced a form of piracy after he assumed power, and as tensions between America and the Crown increased, the King’s Navy increased the practices condemned here by the Founders.“He has excited domestic Insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the Inhabitants of our Frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known Rule of Warfare, is an undistinguished Destruction, of all Ages, Sexes and Conditions.” The Founders had enough trouble as it was without George III’s men inciting the Indians to attack. The Indians practiced Total War, leaving nothing alive that didn’t escape the kill zone. This was therefore the use of terrorism by the Colonists’ own king. The redress demanded here is that the King not use his military and his Indian allies to crush the Colonists, who only sought fairness from him.“He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation, and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & Perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.” The Founders let slip the first serious breach of decorum, the contempt for the most powerful king on earth. Also a bit of hyperbole. Up to the edge of but not over the actual indiscretion of a personal insult.“In every stage of these Oppressions we have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble Terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated Injury. A Prince, whose Character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the Ruler of a free People.” POW!!! Take that, thou knave of a king! There’s your insult, and this one is self-explanatory.“Nor have we been wanting in Attentions to our British Brethren. We have warned them from Time to Time of Attempts by their Legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the Circumstances of our Emigration and Settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and Magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the Ties of our common Kindred to disavow these Usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our Connections and Correspondence. They too have been deaf to the Voice of Justice and of Consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the Necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of Mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace, Friends.” The Founders addressed the fact that they garnered no support from their English counterparts—the oppressed peoples of Great Britain. Who were too used to domination, too accepting their fate, and too immediately under the King’s guns to support the Americans in their pleas, despite sharing the Americans’ oppressed lives in England. So the Founders said, Well, shit. We really want our families and friends and fellow English subjects in England to help us any way they may, else by necessity of our only recourse we be cut off from them. If not, we’re on our own, and so be it. If you take up arms against us with the Redcoats, your blood shall runnel amingle with theirs on the field of battle. Should you not fight us, then we are friends.“We, therefore, the Representatives of the United States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the World for the Rectitude of our Intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly Publish and Declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be, Free and Independent States, that they are absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political Connection between them and the State of Great-Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm Reliance on the Protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our fortunes, and our sacred Honor.” Double POW!!! The Founders said here that they addressed their plight and cause to God. They dared tell the King of England and the royal courts of Europe that they were wresting from the King a centuries-old tradition, the power of war. They knew this meant war, and that the onus of success or failure was on them.What do we see in this break-up letter?The King was ignoring or depressing basic human rightsThe Founders believed that common men not kings should rule nationsThe King was attempting to crush the Colonies under the weight of deliberate tyrannyThe King had refused to recognize the few Colonies-friendly laws Parliament did passThe King literally owned the magistrates of the English courts so rulings went the King’s wayThe King owned the military and used it to abuse the colonists and defile their homes, and protected the military from suits at law, thereby strengthening its ability to abuse colonists and defile homesThe King’s accountants and tax goons set tax rates arbitrarily and punitively, causing great financial burden upon someThe King suspended the Canadian English Common Law and placed the government under English dominion, and was concluded to have aimed similarly at America for the purpose of total controlThe King had in essence abandoned just governance in the Colonies and rescinded his obligatory protection of them by instigating several armed conflicts of various scopeThe King’s military had attacked American Colonists ashore and asea, and impressed captured American sailors into sea duty aboard English warships, forcing them to attack their own people; if they refused, they were forced to suicide, including walking the plank (this practice continued even after the War, and was even cited as a cause for declaring war against Britain in 1812)The King’s agents worked in the background with American Torries, inciting them to oppose Separation, and with American Indians, urging the harassment and murder of colonistsThe King arranged the transport, use, pay, and provisioning of Hessians and other Germans and European nationals as front-line troops to oppress the Colonists (and later in open combat during the War)The King ignored the repeated pleas of the Colonists for the King to treat honestly and in good faith with them for mutually beneficial resolutions to the many problems America was having with EnglandThe King so oppressed his people around the globe (and was only slightly more popular with Georgian-era Brits at home in England) that the English people turned a deaf ear to the Colonists’ pleas for sympathy and solidarity (but the Colonists wanted the people of England to know they were not against the Brits if the Brits weren’t against them; their beef was with the King)And to wrap it all up, the Founders informed the King that this Declaration was not just another petition for redress, but was in fact notification that the last straw had already been broken and no compromise was any longer possible; this letter was a service of papers of divorcementNotice something about every gripe listed: they are all problems arising from the near-absolute power of a king. The list is long, but necessary, as the Founders were laying bare their case for independence not just before their king, but also the royal courts of Europe (Franklin wasn’t just eating and carousing with the femmes in France). The coming war must seem just to the King’s peers if America were to be recognized as legitimate and if there was any hope of finding allies against the English. The brunt of that work was done through the Committee of Secret Correspondence.From the language of the DoI, it is clear that the Founders were fed up with their king, but do they offer clues as to their intent after gaining independence, should they prevail against the King? They do. They intended a complete severance from the English King, that much is clear. The language is even diplomatically insulting— “A Prince, whose Character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the Ruler of a free People.” You’re nothing but a bully, a Caesar, but you’re no King.But had the fact and extent of a king’s abuses been enough to turn America away from the idea of monarchy, or could Congress have with an easy conscience made America the first independent New World kingdom? Were they equally abhorrent of the idea of an American king as they were of the reality of the King of England? Rid the King of England, could they have established a benign American King? They could have; constitutional monarchies do exist in which the king is little more than figurehead (as in England today—the Royal family serves only to drain the English coffers and give photo ops and gossip columns fodder). But in 1790, what would have been the point of establishing a figurehead monarchy? Merely for a foppish representative among the world’s kings? No, as the evidence shows these men had designs that the US if there be one were to be a ship of state among the world’s nations (the Constitution, with all its lofty treatise on Congress’ international authority, duty, and obligations, was written before America actually had nations to do those things with; these international duties were carryovers of what the Founders intended from before the DoI). The Founders thought deeply about what their ideal country might look like once the dangerous word separation was accepted as a very real possibility. This was treason, cut and dried, plain and simple, no two ways about it. One well-placed spy or eager loyalist among them could have landed them all swinging from the gallows or hanging limp on the post. Once bold, ever bolder. No turning back, and if there be no turning back, then what way, forward?In for a penny, in for the last drop of their blood. So there best be a plan. Here is the only place I believe a push for an American king has an excellent chance of succeeding if they rebel and if they win and if they all survive and if they aren’t immediately attacked by Spain, France, Holland, Portugal… And the last part had to be considered second after only we’re actually rebelling. If they break away, who might want in? Best to try to get allies before starting a fire. Enter Ben Franklin. Bonjour, Excellence, comment allez-vous? France was America’s largest, most powerful, wealthiest, and at times only, ally. France also disliked England and that’s what got Louis’ ear. Louis was a fiat taxation man himself, but he wanted things England had. Franklin had managed to make himself a star in France and had met Louis XV before the Colonies bent toward revolution. A known quantity, the French people listened to Franklin when he came back to enlist their aid in the cause of Liberté, a favorite cause of the French, despite their being a monarchy (but the American revolution victory, ironically aided by the French King, played no small part in the French Revolution a few years after the American—off with their heads! and all).Every major European nation (and in 1790, Europe was the center of the universe) and most minor ones had a monarch under various titles. Monarchy was predominant in Europe even theough the 19th century. And Kings liked other Kings. They respected the others’ authority, even if they warred. There was a tradition of monarchal respect on the battlefield. Kings made national policy. They offered stability even if it came with cruelty at times. They made treaties, but also war.So the Founders, a handful of men who dared challenge the King of England, envisioning their dream government should they win, could have decided among them who was to be King of the United States of America at this first point in the conversation. Or decided on a method for populating the first throne at the very least.America might have found quicker acceptance in some of the courts of Europe if she’d been a kingdom. As it was, she found quick acceptance among some simply because of the ‘enemy of my enemy’ thing…England had a lot of enemies in the early modern period.So there were some (if dubious) advantages. Yet America didn’t go monarchy. The reasons were given. What could have changed their minds? What could have made America go monarchy? Right here at the very start, the we’re really doing this? Okay, I know it’s crazy, ’cause they’re going to kill us all, but, what if…I mean, what if we win? What do we do then? We have to have an end-game to the revolution, we have to form some kind of government. That government had to be agreed to the minute they agreed they were going to tell the King they were done with him. They couldn’t go to war with no plan for victory’s aftermath. So either immediately before or immediately after the sealing of their fates—the declaration of war that lurked in the letter they crafted—right then, they had to know.From the question’s details:Alteration of important historical events. Well, you can’t change much history without in myriad ways changing all of history. The so-called butterfly effect, but in time. What historical occurrence, if changed, could have resulted in an American king? Probably the English king being benevolent (ha!) enough that the Colonists’ anger was aimed at separation only and not complete severance with every existing contemporary governmental model.The colonists had been growing dissatified with the rule of a distant king before the most severe restrictions, taxes, and skirmishes had started anyway. So the willingness to break might have been fomented without the anti-King rhetoric.If you play with any time line, without any further stated restrictions, it allows you to play with any other timeline as well. You’re saying, what happened, didn’t really happen but this did. We might need to to answer that question. Let’s think about how the third of colonists who avidly supported separation were thus convinced to actions beyond the words.Many had already felt the stings of injustice at His Majesty’s pleasure. But a rabble needs a rouser to become revolutionaries. There were many excellent debates in the local media at the time. ‘Local media’ meant largely town criers and the word of mouth I’m afraid, with only scant newspaper accounts by comparison to the vox populii.But some excellent examples of written arguments do survive, including some newspapers, pamphlets—most notably Common Sense, The Federalist Papers, and The Anti-Federalist Papers, perhaps the three most recognizable words of the Founders and their cohorts.Suppose Common Sense had been Common Sense: The Case For America’s Own King ? Suppose The Federalist Papers had been The Royalist Papers ? Suppose these two movements had been instead of what was, and had won out. Would the thrust of these two movements, altered to pursue an American crown, have had as much success recruiting support among the colonoists as the revolution had?Well, why not? Americans—um, Englishmen—living in colonial America would have never known aught but the King. It was in their families’ histories for hundreds of years. It was the natural order. Crafted and sold the right way, it might even have gained perhaps a little more traction than ‘We’re going to bloody well break off from His Majesty and we’re going it alone’.Of course, either way, we would have needed help…we had no money, no standing, and no Army to speak of. Bon jour, Comte de Rochambeau! Vive la France! It might have seemed a bit more proper thing to say ‘Right, we’ve decided that as we are so far from England, and as we are growing and prosperous, and our customs so differ from England’s, well, we’ve decided we ought have our own King. In the tradition of Europe, of course, so please don’t be terribly wroth. Of course we shall have to offer satisfaction in combat, though we regret it. Should we prevail, we shall treat with the Courts of Europe and with you, Your Majesty, to install a royal bloodline on our throne. From thenceforth, we should like only to function and treat with thee as equal statesmen in Europe do.”That might have been an easier sell—look, friends and neighbors, we know a lot of you are really unhappy. So how about we just get our own king? Let him tell all of them off. The third who were eager to separate would still have played, knowing it meant war. The indifferent third would have dodged bullets like they did anyway, and the reluctant third would still have carried out their interferences and ratting-outs that they did.But only if an American Crown were never truly resting solely on the annointed head…only if the hands of the people never loosed their grip on the Crown. Given that, selling a new Monarchy would have been an easier task.But Mad George would still have thrown England into war in the Americas. Kings don’t let rebels be Kings. It’s weak. No, Kings fight. There still would have been war.As to assassinations, I cannot think of any that would have propelled America toward its own monarchy, only further from it. Every voice for separation was also a voice clearly anti-King. Silencing a revolutionary separatist would only urge on the revolution’s support, and in the direction the slain had aimed it. So the separatists’ voices would have to have been pro-separation and pro-monarchy in the immediate post-independence afterglow.That is the only way I see that America could have been established as a Monarchy—in the planning stages immediately before the Revolution. The goal is made clear when the hostilities begin, but the idea driving the rebellion must be formed and debated, the course, the goal, defined before the fighting, else the fighting serves mere anarchic chaos.Had the stated goal before the war been to enthrone a King of America, I can easily imagine when Cornwallis surrendered to Washington at Yorktown, he possibly would have recognized Washington’s impending coronation by surrendering in the European fashion of battlefield capitulation, and possibly called him “Your Excellency.” Lofty, but not quite yet regal. Cornwallis probably still would have attenpted to surrender to Rochambeau—established and recognized European nobility, you see—but Rochambeau surely would still have deferred to Washington.I hope you endured to the end and forgive the length, but I felt the information was necessary to answer such a deep question.*Another third didn’t care one way or the other, and the last third did not want to break with England. So, all the people who think America sucks, who march and burn and riot and occupy, all the people who talk America down to anyone who’ll listen, to all the mediots who spew anti-American hate, your freedom to do those things was won by the one third of the people who had the balls to make this country for you, and then wrote you a Constitution to protect your rights. Otherwise you’d be singing “God Save the Queen” at cricket matches here today.**Senators were originally appointed by their states’ legislatures, intended as a way to minimize Federal power in Congress: the appointed Senators were expected to vote in a protectionist way for their state and legislate in a way beneficial to their state. Time stabilized political structure and organized parties began to arise and grow. The parties, being as they reflected the ideas of many in the populace not just the few within the marbled halls of the states’ legislatures, began to feel that the voice of the people was being overlooked in the name of avoiding Federalism. The original intent of the Founders on populating the Senate quickly fell to the demand that the people elect all of the Big Three (President, Senate, House). Thus the 17th Amendment. Prior to the 17th, the unelected Senate could minimalize the shorter-termed House of Representatives’ more fluid composition (Representatives are elected for 2 years, Senators, 6). The House changes more rapidly with the times than the Senate. And originally Senators were expected to follow the directions of their state’s legislatures and not necessarily the wishes of their electorate.

May I suggest that you read the following information thoroughly and then circulate it:The term “occupation” is a fallacious Orwellian myth, because “occupation” means that the “occupier” stole another state’s sovereign land.The land of Israel aka the Promised Land or also known as the Holy Land has been the historical, ancestral indigenous Homeland of the Jewish people for over 3 millennium.The Jewish people never left their country even with several Expulsions of part of the population.Jewish settlements historyNew Map Reveals Truth About 'Occupation' in the Land of Israel | United with IsraelAn Israeli researcher combats false claims that Arabs are indigenous to the Land of Israel and reasserts the truth that this land historically belonged to the Jewish people.https://unitedwithisrael.org/new-map-reveals-truth-about-occupation-in-the-land-of-israel/Historical Proof of Jewish Continuity in IsraelWorshipers pray in distance from each other at the Western Wall in Jerusalem’s Old City, amid coronavirus restrictions, March 26, …https://www.algemeiner.com/2020/09/30/historical-proof-of-jewish-continuity-in-israel/When Israel liberated Judea/Samaria in a defensive war in 1967, it was no one’s sovereign land. It was illegally occupied by Jordan from 1948-67.There was never a Palestinian state in Israel, Judea/Samaria (a.k.a. the West Bank) and/or Jerusalem.There was never a Palestinian State, no Palestinian Kings and Queens. No Palesinian history, language nor archeology.There are no "Palestinian" archeological artifacts in any of the world's finest museums.In fact, Judea/Samaria and the eastern portion of Jerusalem were and are land lawfully designated for the Jewish state under the Mandate and International Law, without mentioning here the historical, Biblical, ancestral connection of the indigenous Jewish people to the land.Palestinians: What is Fact, What is FictionA look at Palestinians, the legitimacy of their claims vs the Jews by looking at historical, archaeological, census and eyewitness accounts.https://news.0censor.com/palestinians-historical-claims/Even archeology attests to these facts:Ancient Muslim Texts Confirm the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem | Jerusalem Center for Public AffairsJerusalem Center researcher Nadav Shragai responds to modern-day Muslim and Palestinian fabrications about the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem with thehttps://jcpa.org/ancient-muslim-texts-confirm-the-jewish-temple-in-jerusalem/This West Bank Land Is Not ‘Palestinian’The community of Beit El in Judea and Samaria. Photo: Wikimedia Commons. “Who can challenge the rights of the Jews …https://www.algemeiner.com/2020/08/24/this-west-bank-land-is-not-palestinian/There is no legally recognized independent State of Palestine:Member Stateshttps://www.un.org/en/member-states/index.htmlThe UN classifies the Palestinians as having “non-Member Observer State status.”https://www.un.org/en/sections/member-states/non-member-states/index.htmlPalestinian Myths and Israeli RealitiesIllustrative. Photo: Reuters / Ammar Awad. I like to deal in truth and reality, so here are some facts: Israel …https://www.algemeiner.com/2020/05/20/palestinian-myths-and-israeli-realities/See Encyclopedia Britannica 11th editionThe Encyclopaedia Britannica : a dictionary of arts, sciences, literature and general information / [Hugh Chisholm, editor]. v. 20.Toggle Options Options Optionshttps://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=uc1.b2900093&view=1up&seq=658"Under the Ottoman jurisdiction, Palestine has no independent existence. West of the Jordan, and to about half-way between Nablus and Jerusalem, is the southern portion of the vilayet or province of Beirut. South of this point is the Sanjak of Jerusalem. Nazareth with its immediate neighborhood is added, so as to bring all the principal holy places under one jurisdiction. East of the Jordan the country forms part of the larger vilayet of Syria, whose centre is Damascus."As we see in the description in the Encyclopedia, nationalities and countries represented in “Palestine” at the time included Bedouin, Arabs, Nowar, Armenians, Greeks, Italians, Jews, Turkomen, Persians, Afghanis, Mutawila, Kurds, Germans, Circassians, Turks, Sudanese and Algerians.But no “Palestinians-”To summarize this point, on the ground there was no administrative political jurisdiction called “Palestine.”The ruling Ottoman power was blind to the existence of such a territory. To the Caliphate in Constantinople the Ottoman maps show provinces (Vilayet) and administrative districts (Sanjak), with no relation to then Palestine.At the UN Security Council on 31.5.1956, Ahmad Shuqairy, Deputy Secretary-General of the Arab League, testified on the agenda item still called the “Palestine Question” said, as Haj Amin had been saying since the Peace Conference of 1919, that:“it's common knowledge that Palestine is nothing but southern Syria.”The Arab League of States he represented remained adamant that there was no such country as Palestine.The above documents are under embargo.Hum, I wonder why?(In 1964, Shuqairy was appointed the first leader of a new organization called the PLO).https://daccess-ods.un.org/access.nsf/Get?OpenAgent&DS=S/RES/113(1956)&Lang=Ehttps://daccess-ods.un.org/access.nsf/Get?OpenAgent&DS=S/RES/113(1956)&Lang=EHence, it is impossible for Israel to be an “occupier” of “Palestinian” land.Who Owns the Land?It never stops: Europeans complain about Israel building things, or rather, about Israelis planning to build things. Such activities, they claim are illegal, because according to them nothing east of the 1949 armistice line belongs to Israel. But to whom does it really belong? A starting point is the question that the blogger who calls himself Elder of Ziyon asked in a tweet the other day: “what country was legitimately sovereign in Judea and Samaria on the day prior to the start of the 1967 war?” Jordan illegally occupied the territory in 1948, when it was one of five Arab countries that invaded the area of the former British Mandate in order to try to prevent the Jews from creating a sovereign state there (and indeed, to try to kill and drive out the Jews from the land). In 1950 it (again illegally) annexed the area and named it the “West Bank.” This aggression clearly violated the UN charter, and in the 19 years that Jordan held it, only two nations (Britain and Pakistan) recognized its purported ownership. Incidentally, the Jordanians committed numerous war crimes during their conquest and occupation, starting with the violent ethnic cleansing of its Jewish inhabitants, and including the deliberate destruction of synagogues and the refusal to allow Jews and Christians to visit their holy sites in Jerusalem – something Jordan had agreed to in the cease-fire agreements. For several reasons, Israel’s claim in 1967 was stronger than that of Jordan’s. One is that the beneficiary of the Mandate is the Jewish people; it refers to the creation of a “Jewish Home” and not an Arab one. It is also reasonable to understand the “home” as being a state, although probably the British envisioned it as more like a protectorate within their empire. And an Arab state (Jordan) had already been created in part of it. Another argument is the doctrine of uti possidetis juris , which holds that new sovereign states resulting from decolonization get the same boundaries as the former colonial entities ( an article explaining the application to Israel is here ). The doctrine is intended to prevent the creation of “no-man’s lands” which could become the source of conflict – as indeed this area has! I haven’t mentioned the 1947 UN partition resolution for an important reason: it is irrelevant to international law. As a General Assembly resolution, it was only a recommendation; and since the Arabs immediately rejected it, it was never implemented. It did express the will of the majority of UN members at the time that a Jewish (and Arab) state could be created in the area between the Jordan and the Mediterranean, but it had no binding force. Finally, there is the argument for the rights of the oldest extant indigenous people – the aboriginal inhabitants. The Ottomans controlled the land for 400 years. Before that there was a succession of foreign rulers all the way back to the last Jewish commonwealth in Judea, the Hasmonean Dynasty which lasted for about 80 years around 10http://abuyehuda.com/2020/08/who-owns-the-land/Bank of Palestine was a Jewish bank with Jewish currencies and coinsPalestine pound - WikipediaPalestine pound Coinage Issued by the Palestine currency Board Image Value Technical parameters Description Date of first issue Dated years of issue Diameter Mass Composition Edge Obverse Reverse 1 mil 21 mm 3.23 g Bronze Plain "Palestine" in Arabic , English , and Hebrew , year of minting. In Hebrew; also mentions in the acronym (א״י) for Eretz Yisrael (Land of Israel). Value in Arabic , English , and Hebrew , olive sprig 1927 1927, 1935, 1937, 1939, 1940, 1941, 1942, 1943, 1944, 1946 2 mils 28 mm 7.77 g 1927, 1941, 1942, 1945, 1946 5 mils 20 mm 2.91 g Cupro-nickel Value in Arabic , English , and Hebrew 1927, 1934, 1935, 1939, 1941, 1946 5 mills 20 mm 2.9 Bronze 1942 1942, 1944 10 mils 27 mm 6.47 g Cupro-nickel 1927 1927, 1933, 1934, 1935, 1937, 1939, 1940, 1941, 1942, 1946 10 mils 27 mm 6.47 Bronze 1942 1942, 1943 20 mils 30.5 mm 11.33 g Cupro-nickel 1927 1927, 1933, 1934, 1935, 1940, 1941 20 mils 30.5 mm 11.3 Bronze 1942 1942, 1944 50 mils 23.5 mm 5.83 g 720‰ Silver Reeded "Palestine" in Arabic , English , and Hebrew , year of minting, olive sprig. In Hebrew; also mentions in the acronym (א״י) for Eretz Yisrael (Land of Israel). 1927 1927, 1931, 1933, 1934, 1935, 1939, 1940, 1942, 1943 100 mils 29 mm 11.66 g Issued by the State of Israel Image Value Technical parameters Description Date of first issue Dated years of issue Diameter Mass Composition Edge Obverse Reverse 1 pruta [12] 21 mm 1.3 g Aluminum Plain Anchor; " Israel " in Hebrew and Arabic . The design is based on a coin of Alexander Jannaeus (76-103 BCE). The denomination "1 Pruta" and the date in Hebrew ; two stylized olive branches around the rim. 25 October 1950 5709 (1949) 5 pruta 20 mm 3.2 g Bronze Four-stringed lyre; "Israel" in Hebrew and Arabic . The design is based on a coin from the Bar-Kochba Revolt (132-135CE). The denomination "5 Pruta" and the date in Hebrew ; two stylized olive branches around the rim. 28 December 1950 10 pruta 27 mm 6.1g Two-handled amphora ; "Israel" in Hebrew and Arabic. The design is based on a coin from the Bar-Kochba Revolt (132-135CE). The denomination "10 Pruta" and the date in Hebrew ; two stylized olive branches around the rim. 4 January 1950 25 mil 30 mm 3.8 g Aluminum Cluster of grapes, based on coins struck during the Bar-Kochba Revolt (132-135 CE); "Israel" in Hebrew above and in Arabic below. The denomination "25 Mil" in Hebrew and Arabic ; date in Hebrew below; two stylized olive branches around, based on coins struck during the Bar-Kochba Revolt (132-135 CE). 6 April 1949 5708 (1948), 5709 (1949) 25 pruta 19.5 mm 2.8 g Cupro-nickel Reeded Value and date in Hebrew within wreath. 4 January 1950 5709 (1949) 50 pruta 23.5 mm 5.69 g A Branch of Grape Leaves. Value and date within wreath made up of two stylized olive branches that for a circle around perimeter. 11 May 1949 100 pruta 2.4 mm 28.5 mm Date palm tree with seven branches and two bunches of dates. Country name is listed in Hebrew and Arabic . Value and date in Hebrew within wreath ofhttps://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestine_pound"In 1937, a local Arab leader, Auni Bey Abdul-Hadi, told the Peel Commission, which ultimately suggested the partition of Palestine: "There is no such country [as Palestine]! 'Palestine' is a term the Zionists invented! There is no Palestine in the Bible. Our country was for centuries part of Syria."Moshe Kohn, “The Arabs’ ‘Lie’ of the Land,” Jerusalem Post, (October 18, 1991).Myths & Facts - Israel’s Roots“The Jews have no claim to the land they call Israel.” “Palestine was always an Arab country.” “The Palestinians are descendants of the Canaanites and were in Palestine long before the Jews.” “The Balfour Declaration did not give Jews a right to a homeland in Palestine.” “The 'traditional position' of the Arabs in Palestine was jeopardized by Jewish settlement.” “Zionism is racism.” “The delegates of the U.N. World Conference Against Racism agreed that Zionism is racism.” “The Zionists could have chosen another country besides Palestine.” “Herzl himself proposed Uganda as the Jewish state as an alternative to Palestine.” “All Arabs opposed the Balfour Declaration, seeing it as a betrayal of their rights.” “The Zionists made no effort to compromise with the Arabs.” “The Zionists were colonialist tools of Western imperialism.” “The British promised the Arabs independence in Palestine in the Hussein-MacMahon Correspondence.” “The Arabs fought for freedom in World Wars I and II.” “Israeli policies cause anti-Semitism.” “Supporters of Israel only criticize Arabs and never Israelis.” MYTH “The Jews have no claim to the land they call Israel.” FACT A common misperception is that all the Jews were forced into the Diaspora by the Romans after the destruction of the Second Temple in Jerusalem in the year 70 C.E. and then, 1,800 years later, suddenly returned to Palestine demanding their country back. In reality, the Jewish people have maintained ties to their historic homeland for more than 3,700 years. The Jewish people base their claim to the Land of Israel on at least four premises: 1) the Jewish people settled and developed the land; 2) the international community granted political sovereignty in Palestine to the Jewish people; 3) the territory was captured in defensive wars and 4) God promised the land to the patriarch Abraham. Even after the destruction of the Second Temple in Jerusalem and the beginning of the exile, Jewish life in the Land of Israel continued and often flourished. Large communities were reestablished in Jerusalem and Tiberias by the ninth century. In the 11th century, Jewish communities grew in Rafah, Gaza, Ashkelon , Jaffa and Caesarea . The Crusaders massacred many Jews during the 12th century, but the community rebounded in the next two centuries as large numbers of rabbis and Jewish pilgrims immigrated to Jerusalem and the Galilee. Prominent rabbis established communities in Safed , Jerusalem and elsewhere during the next 300 years. By the early 19th century — years before the birth of the mhttps://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/myths-and-facts-israel-146-s-rootsInternational Recognition of ZionismAt the San Remo conference in 1920, the Supreme Allied Council of the victorious powers accorded Britain mandatory powers in Palestine. The terms of the Balfour Declaration were incorporated into its terms, the preamble noting the "historical connection of the Jewish people with then Palestine" and calling for a reconstitution of their "national home in that country."San RemoHow San Remo Birthed the Jewish National HomeThere is probably no more understated event in the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict than the San Remo conference of April 1920. Convened for a mere week as part of the post-World War I peace conferences, which created a new international order onhttps://www.meforum.org/60748/how-san-remo-birthed-the-jewish-national-home?utm_sourceThe San Remo Conference 100 Years OnThere is probably no more understated event in the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict than the San Remo Conference of April 1920. Convened for a mere week as part of the post-WWI peace conferences that created a new international order on the basis of indigenous self-rule and national self-determination, the San Remo conference appointed Britain as mandatory for Palestine with the specific task of “putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2, 1917, by the British Government , and adopted by the other Allied Powers, in favour of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.” This mandate was then ratified on July 24, 1922 by the Council of the League of Nations—the postwar world organization and the UN’s predecessor.https://besacenter.org/mideast-security-and-policy-studies/san-remo-conference/https://israelforever.org/m/U2FsdGVkX19mU4bCQpX66z5UzV-54wrYHWerGg1m-7bpr08tabkS3EabA_I-1GGbfOtFevtX8E0https://israelbehindthenews.com/1920-the-year-the-conflict-commenced/20003/?utm_sourceWinston Churchill’s Defense of the Balfour Declaration in 1921“It is manifestly right that the Jews ... should have a national centre and a National Home where some of them may be reunited.” - Lenny Ben-Davidhttps://jcpa.org/article/winston-churchills-defense-balfour-declaration-1921/In 1922, Britain removed Trans-Jordan from the promises of the mandate, contrary to the wishes of the Zionist organization, and in 1922 the League of Nations officially awarded the mandate to Britain.The American Administration had already supported the Balfour Declaration in August 1918, and in 1922 the U.S. Congress endorsed an essentially similar document in a joint resolution.The result was that not only had the Balfour Declaration received support from two of the victorious powers in the war, it was also given international sanction. In the relatively short span of a quarter century, Zionism had taken a giant step towards realizing the principal aim set forth in its 1897 platform. Preparations for a Jewish state could now proceed under British protection until such a time as a decisive Jewish majority was established.The land in question was designated for the Jewish homeland under the 1922 Mandate, confirmed by the 1946 UN Charter, and under the Anglo-American Convention and other international treaties.Of central importance was the Jewish contention that the Palestine Mandate constituted legal recognition of Jewish national rights in Palestine: "The Balfour Declaration became a binding and unchallengeable international obligation from the moment when it was embodied in the Palestine Mandate" (Feinberg 1974, 242). This "right" to establish a "national home" in Palestine was preserved by the UN Charter whose Article 80 stipulates that nothing be done to alter the rights "of any states or any peoples" in territories currently under mandate. Hence, the world community is obligated to honor the commitments of the Mandate.Debunking Arab lieshttps://www.israelheartlandreport.com/news/the-beginnings-of-the-state-of-israel-in-1920?mc_cid=849238cfe4&mc_eid=e5ad3f4a35https://www.mythsandfacts.org/replyonlineedition/chapter-9.htmlArticle 80 of the UN CharterThe writer is an alumnus of Harvard and UCLA. The Jewish Agency that was named in the League of Nations Mandate for Palestine had a good grasp of the history of that Mandate and its purpose.  It wrote it down for the UN Charter drafting Committee and submitted it in April 1945.  The UN Charter is dated June 24, 1945. The document it submitted was entitled MEMORANDUM SUBMITTED TO THE UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE ON INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION , SAN FRANCISCO , CALIFORNIA , BY THE JEWISH AGENCY FOR PALESTINE APRIL, 1945.  You can find it on-line at: http://www.bjpa.org/Publications/downloadFile.cfm?FileID=22125  It is part of the legislative history for Article 80 of the UN Charter.  Chaim Weizmann signed it. The Agency is named in the Mandate as the official advisor to those administering the Mandate.  The Agency describes the intent of this legal instrument as follows: "The underlying intent and purpose of this international covenant is clear and was authoritatively reaffirmed by the British Royal Commission on Palestine (1937). The declarations, as quoted by the Commission, of leading statesmen responsible for the undertaking leave no doubt that what was intended was to afford the Jewish people the right and opportunity by immigration and settlement to transform Palestine into a Jewish State. Mr. Lloyd George, Prime Minister at the time of the Declaration, was explicit to this effect and other members of the British Government at that time, including Lord Robert Cecil in 1917, Sir Herbert Samuel in 1919, and Mr. Winston Churchill in 1920, "spoke or wrote in terms that could mean only that they contemplated the eventual establishment of a Jewish State." General Smuts too, who had been a member of the Imperial War Cabinet when the Balfour Declaration  was published, speaking in November, 1919 foretold an increasing stream of Jewish immigration into Palestine and "in generations to come a great Jewish State rising there once more." "That this was also the understanding of the American Delegation at the Peace Conference appears from the Outline of Tentative Report and Recommendations prepared by the Intelligence Section of that Delegation, in accordance with instructions, for the President and Plenipotentiaries at the Peace Conference, dated January 21, 1919,which recommended: "1. That there be established a separate state of Palestine. "2. That this state be placed under Great Britain as a Mandatory of the League of Nations. "3. That the Jews be invited to return to Palestine and settle there, being assured by the Conference of all proper assistance in so doing that may be consistent with the protection of the personal (especially the religious) and property rights of the non-Jewish population, and being further assured that it will be the policy of the League of Nations to recognize Palestine as a Jewish State as soon as it is a Jewish State in fact." In line with this President Wilson on March 3, 1919 declared: "I am persuaded that the Allied Nationshttp://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/19896As per Article 80 of the UN Charter, no UN resolution can override Israel’s existing legal rights and title of sovereignty over any region of the Land of Israel based on earlier acts of International Law: The Jan Smuts Resolution of January 30, 1919, Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations, including the Treaty of Versailles of June 28, 1919, the San Remo Resolution of April 25, 1920, the Mandate for Palestine as confirmed on July 24, 1922 and the Franco-British Convention of December 23, 1920, all of which recognized the historical connection of the Jewish People with the Land of Israel.The Lodge-Fish Resolution of September 21, 1922, was a Joint Resolution passed by both houses of the U.S. Congress and signed by President Warren Harding, endorsing the Balfour Declaration with slight variations. This made the text of the Joint Resolution part of the law of the United States until this very day."Resolved by the Senate and House of representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, that the United states of America favors the establishment in Palestine of a national Home for the Jewish people..."confirming the irrevocable right of Jews to settle in the area of Palestine — anywhere between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea:Under American Law when a joint resolution is passed by both the Senate and the House of Representatives in an identical form and then signed by the President, it becomes the Law of the U.S.7. Both the Lodge-Fish Resolution and the Anglo American Convention underwent the above noted process (see point 6). Therefore reconstituting Palestine as a National Homeland for the Jewish People worldwide and recognizing their historical connection to the land became part of US LAW.Any attempt to negate the Jewish people's right to Palestine — Eretz-Israel — and to deny them access and control in the area designated for the Jewish people by the League of Nations is an actionable infringement of both international law and the Supremacy Clause (Article VI, paragraph 2 of the United States Constitution), which dictates that Treaties "shall be the supreme Law of the Land".Lodge–Fish Resolution - WikipediaLodge-Fish Resolution Long title Joint Resolution Favoring the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish People Enacted by the 67th United States Congress Effective September 21, 1922 Public law 67-73 Introduced in the Senate by Henry Cabot Lodge ( R - MA ) on June 30, 1922 Passed the House on (passed voice vote) Passed the Senate on Agreed to by the House on and by the Senate on (agreed) Signed into law by President Warren G. Harding on September 21, 1922 The Lodge–Fish Resolution [1] was a joint resolution of both houses of the US Congress that endorsed the Jewish-Mandate for Palestine protected by the British Mandate for Palestine . [3] [4] It was introduced in June 1922 by Hamilton Fish III , a Republican New York Representative , and Henry Cabot Lodge , a Republican Senator from Massachusetts . [5] It came about following a significant lobbying effort by the American Zionist community , particularly through the efforts of Zionist Rabbi Simon Glazer . [5] It was opposed by the State Department ; a prominent anti-Zionist rabbi at the congressional hearings; and the New York Times , which was owned by the anti-Zionist Adolph Ochs . [5] On September 21, 1922, US President Warren G. Harding signed the joint resolution of approval to establish a Jewish National Home in Palestine , per the 1917 Balfour Declaration . [6] [5] The full text is as follows: "Favoring the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled . That the United States of America favors the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which should prejudice the civil and religious rights of Christian and all other non-Jewish communities in Palestine, and that the holy places and religious buildings and sites in Palestine shall be adequately protected." [italics in the original] Bibliography [ edit ] References [ edit ] ^ Lodge-Fish Resolution, Pub.L. 67–73 , Sep 21, 1922, 42 Stat. 1012. ^ Lebow 1968 , p. 501. ^ 67th Congress, H.J.Res. 322; pdf ^ Brecher 1987 . ^ a b c d Medoff 2002 , p. 215-216. ^ Howard Grief, The Legal Foundation and Borders of Israel under International Law , (Mazo Publishers, Jerusalem, 2008), p. 198.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lodge-Fish_ResolutionSix Facts You Must Know About The Balfour Declaration and the Right to a Jewish National HomelandBalfour in 6 easy steps.https://israelforever.org/interact/blog/six_facts_you_must_know_about_the_balfour_declaration_and_the_right_to_a_jewish_national_homeland/?utm_content=Link+538802&utm_campaign=Newsletter&utm_source=A+Longing+Across+Time+and+Space&utm_medium=EmailA Palestinian-Arab state on land lawfully designated for the Jewish state violates U.S. treaty obligations (the 1924 Anglo-American Convention/Treaty and UN Charter) guaranteeing the Jewish people’s rights to the entire mandatory area, including Judea/Samaria.It also contradicts the Oslo Accords, which, as confirmed by then-Prime Minister Yitzchak Rabin’s last speech to the Knesset, contemplated a Palestinian entity that is less than a state.Armistice Agreement of 1949http://www.knesset.gov.il/process/docs/armistice_jordan_eng.htmhttp://www.knesset.gov.il/process/docs/armistice_jordan_eng.htmArticle 69. The Armistice Demarcation Lines defined in articles V and VI of this Agreement are agreed upon by the Parties without prejudice to future territorial settlements or boundary lines or to claims of either Party relating thereto.Setting the Record Straight: Israel’s Legal Rights to Judea and SamariaJoin the world's largest pro-Israel community with over 9 million members! By sharing biblical, historical and modern perspectives, we promote worldwide unity with the People, Country and Land of Israel. Join here –> https://unitedwithisrael.orghttps://unitedwithisrael.org/setting-the-record-straight-israels-legal-rights-to-judea-and-samaria/http://www.mythsandfacts.org/Conflict/mandate_for_palestine/MandateN2%20-%2010-29-07-English.pdfMay 14, 1948 — Miracle or Catastrophe?A Jewish truck that was attacked by Arab irregulars on the main road to Jerusalem, 1948. Photo: Wikimedia Commons. On …https://www.algemeiner.com/2020/05/14/may-14-1948-miracle-or-catastrophe/Nonetheless, Jordan illegally seized Judea/Samaria and the eastern portion of Jerusalem in the 1948-1949 Arab war to destroy Israel.Jordan illegally occupied these areas for the next 19 years. During that time, Jordan killed and expelled the Jews who had lived in eastern Jerusalem for centuries; destroyed 58 synagogues; erased the Jewish Quarter in the Old City of Jerusalem, violated the armistice agreements by refusing to allow Jews any access to holy Jewish religious sites; and used thousands-of-years-old Jewish gravestones to line latrines. Jordan destroyed Jewish towns and villages, factories and the hydro electric power plant. Executed Jewish prisoners of war and expelled all Jews from the Territories. Ethnic cleansing.Jordan's Desecration of Jerualem (1948-1967)Soon after Israel declared its independence , the surrounding Arab states invaded. The Arab Legion of Jordan attacked Jerusalem . Their forces blocked Jerusalem’s roads and cut off the city’s access to water. After bitter fighting, the Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem’s Old City fell to the vastly superior arms and numbers of the Arab Legion on May 27, 1948. The surviving Jewish inhabitants fled to the “New City,” the four-fifths of the capital that Israel successfully held. Nearly twenty years later, during the 1967 Six-Day War , Israel’s army liberated the Old City, finding the Jewish Quarter completely neglected and much of it destroyed. The following is photographic evidence of the destruction. All but one of the 35 synagogues within the Old City were destroyed; those not completely devastated had been used as hen houses and stables filled with dung-heaps, garbage. and carcasses. The revered Jewish graveyard on the Mount of Olives was in complete disarray with thousands of tombstones broken, some of which were used as building materials for roads and latrines. Large areas of the cemetery were leveled to provide a short-cut to a new hotel. Hundreds of Torah scrolls and thousands of holy books were plundered and burned to ashes. Click Left/Right to Scroll Jordanian hotel built on The Mount of Olives . In the background is the road cut through the cemetery. ‹ › Gravestones were used by the Jordanians as cheap building material. ‹ › The Jordinians decied that gavestones would make good stairs. You can see Hebrew inscriptions on the stones. ‹ › Road made of Jewish tombstones. ‹ › Tombstones used as pavement in the Azaria Arab Legion camp on the Jerusaelm-Jericho road ‹ › Tombstone used as a bench at the Azaria Arab Legion camp on the Jerusaelm-Jericho road ‹ › Tombstones used for a wall terrace in Jerusalem ‹ › The Jordanians used Jewish tombstones from The Mount of Olives for extensive army purposes. This is the inside of an Arab Legion Barrack at the Azaria Camp. ‹ › This synagogue, once a beautiful structrure in the Old City, was reduced by the Jordanians to rubble. ‹ › This used to be a place were students would learn and people would sit and pray. These broken walls are all that remain. ‹ › The pile of stones used to be a gate to this synagogue. This gate has beautiful designs and was an attraction of this place of worship. ‹ › This synagogue has been ripped apart. The back wall used to be the ark with many Torah scrolls. More than 300 men used to pray here every Shabbat. ‹ › One of the first synagogues the Jordanians destroyed. It used to be an imposing structure on the skyline that could be seen from miles away. ‹ ›https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jordan-s-desecration-of-jerualem-1948-1967Jordanian snipers perched in eastern Jerusalem hills to shot at Jewish children in the western part of Jerusalem.Arab Threats Against IsraelIn the weeks leading up to the Six Day War, Arab leaders repeatedly threatened Israel with annihilation. Together with Egypt's ejection of United Nations forces, the closing of the Straits of Tiran, and the massing of troops on Israel's northern and southern borders, the fiery rhetoric created a state of existential fear in Israel. Egypt "Our aim is the full restoration of the rights of the Palestinian people. In other words, we aim at the destruction of the State of Israel. The immediate aim: perfection of Arab military might. The national aim: the eradication of Israel." – President Nasser of Egypt, November 18, 1965 "Brothers, it is our duty to prepare for the final battle in Palestine." – Nasser, Palestine Day, 1967 "Our basic objective will be the destruction of Israel. The Arab people want to fight . . . The mining of Sharm el Sheikh is a confrontation with Israel. Adopting this measure obligates us to be ready to embark on a general war with Israel." – Nasser, May 27, 1967 "We will not accept any ... coexistence with Israel. ... Today the issue is not the establishment of peace between the Arab states and Israel .... The war with Israel is in effect since 1948." – Nasser, May 28, 1967 "The armies of Egypt, Jordan, Syria and Lebanon are poised on the borders of Israel . . . . to face the challenge, while standing behind us are the armies of Iraq, Algeria, Kuwait, Sudan and the whole Arab nation. This act will astound the world. Today they will know that the Arabs are arranged for battle, the critical hour has arrived. We have reached the stage of serious action and not declarations." – Nasser, May, 30, 1967 after signing a defense pact with Jordan's King Hussein "We are now ready to confront Israel .... The issue now at hand is not the Gulf of Aqaba, the Straits of Tiran, or the withdrawal of UNEF, but the ... aggression which took place in Palestine ... with the collaboration of Britain and the United States." – Nasser, June 2, 1967 "Under terms of the military agreement signed with Jordan, Jordanian artillery co-ordinated with the forces of Egypt and Syria is in a position to cut Israel in two at Kalkilya, where Israeli territory between the Jordan armistice line and the Mediterranean Sea is only twelve kilometers wide ... ." – El Akhbar newspaper, Cairo, May 31, 1967 Cairo Radio Statements: May 19, 1967: "This is our chance Arabs, to deal Israel a mortal blow of annihilation, to blot out its entire presence in our holy land" May 22, 1967: "The Arab people is firmly resolved to wipe Israel off the map" May 25, 1967: "The Gulf of Aqaba, by the dictum of history and the protection of our soldiers, is Arab, Arab, Arab." May 25, 1967: "Millions of Arabs are ... preparing to blow up all of America's interests, all of America's installations, and your entire existence, America." May 27, 1967: "We challenge you, Eshkol, to try all your weapons. Put them to the test; they will spell Israel's death and annihilation." May 30, 1967: "With the closinhttp://www.sixdaywar.org/content/threats.asp"Israel warned King Husseinnot to enter the war. But his mind was already made up, and he had put Jordan's efficient army under the command of a less than capable Egyptian general."1967 war: Six days that changed the Middle EastThe human drama behind the 1967 Middle East Warhttps://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-39960461" As the King recounted in his book on the war:It was now 9 A.M. on Monday, June 5, and we were at war.Riad [the Egyptian general who commanded Jordanian forces] increased our fire power against the Israeli air bases by directing our heavy artillery – long-range 155's – on the Israeli air force installations within our line of fire. Our field artillery also went into action, and our Hawker Hunters [British-supplied fighter jets] were ready to take part in the combined operation with the Iraqi and Syrians. (Hussein of Jordan: My “War” with Israel, by King Hussein, p 63)With Jordanian artillery raining shells on Israeli targets from Jerusalem to Tel-Aviv and beyond, and Jordanian jets preparing to launch bombing runs, the King received through the U.N. a conciliatory message from Israel stating that if Jordan did not attack Israel, Israel would not attack Jordan. In the King’s own words:... we received a telephone call at Air Force Headquarters from U.N. General Odd Bull. It was a little after 11 A.M.The Norwegian General informed me that the Israeli Prime Minister had addressed an appeal to Jordan. Mr. Eshkol had summarily announced that the Israeli offensive had started that morning, Monday June 5, with operations directed against the United Arab Republic, and then he added: “If you don’t intervene, you will suffer no consequences.”By that time we were already fighting in Jerusalem and our planes had just taken off to bomb Israeli airbases. So I answered Odd Bull:“They started the battle. Well they are receiving our reply by air.”Three times our Hawker Hunters attacked the bases at Natanya in Israel without a loss. And our pilots reported that they destroyed four enemy planes on the ground, the only ones they had seen.On their side, the Iraqis bombed the airport at Lydda. And a little later, the Syrians finally headed for the base at Ramad David and the refineries in Haifa. (Hussein, p. 64-65)Despite the Jordanian attacks, the Israelis did not respond. As the Israeli Foreign Minister Abba Eban put it, the Israelis hoped that “King Hussein was making a formal gesture of solidarity with Egypt,” in other words, that the artillery barrage and bombing runs were for show, and that they did not presage a general offensive. But this was not to be – after the Israelis sent their peace message, the Jordanian attacks only grew in intensity."Jordanian FrontIn the days before June 5, Jordan had deployed in the West Bank opposite Israel ten of its eleven brigades, totaling some 45,000 men. In the north were three infantry brigades: one near the Jordan river, opposite the Israeli town of Beit Shean, one around the city of Jenin, and one near the city of Tulkarem (where Israel is only about 10 miles wide). In the central sector were four brigades: an infantry brigade near Qalqilya, right on the Israeli border, another near Latrun, also on the border, and two around Jerusalem. In the south was an infantry brigade around Hebron, and in the rear, near the Damia bridge over the Jordan river and near Jericho, were two armored brigades, the main striking forces of the Jordanian army. The eleventh Jordanian brigade was deployed south of the Dead Sea, facing Israel’s Negev Desert and pointing towards the Egyptian forces in the Sinai. According to the joint Jordanian-Egyptian plans this brigade’s role was to fight into the Negev and link up with the advancing Egyptians, thereby cutting Israel in half. An Iraqi brigade, based on the other side of the Damia Bridge, with three more on the way, and two Egyptian commando battalions deployed near Latrun rounded out the forces arrayed against Israel on the Jordanian front. The western half of the of the West Bank — that is, the portion bordering on Israel — is mountainous and densely populated, especially the Old City of Jerusalem, and the large cities of Jenin, Nablus, Ramallah and Hebron. The terrain is nothing like the open spaces of the Sinai, so suited to tank warfare. In the West Bank the geography favored the defenders, offering innumerable ambush points and potential bottlenecks, which the Jordanians had supplemented by building many strategically located fortified positions, with trenches, bunkers, ammunition storerooms and gun emplacements. However, because Egypt was the strongest and most threatening of the Arab countries, Israel had to deploy the bulk of its forces in the south. Consequently, against the eleven Jordanian brigades and the Iraqi expeditionary force, the Israelis could muster only three infantry brigades and an armored brigade. Just after hostilities began between Israel and Egypt, the Egyptian commander Marshal Amer sent a message to Jordan’s King Hussein, reporting that 75 percent of Israel’s planes had been shot down or disabled, and urging Hussein to open a second front. As the King recounted in his book on the war: It was now 9 A.M. on Monday, June 5, and we were at war. Riad [the Egyptian general who commanded Jordanian forces] increased our fire power against the Israeli air bases by directing our heavy artillery – long-range 155's – on the Israeli air force installations within our line of fire. Our field artillery also went into action, and our Hawker Hunters [British-supplied fighter jets] were ready to take part in the combined operation with the Iraqi and Syrians. ( Hussein of Jordan: My “War” with Israel , by King Hussein, p 63)http://www.sixdaywar.org/content/easternfront.aspIsrael liberated Judea/Samaria and the eastern portion of Jerusalem in a defensive war in 1967 from the illegal occupation of Jordan.Why history still matters: The 1967 Six Day WarPoliticians, diplomats, and journalists continue to grapple with the consequences of that war, but to make real sense of it, they need to pay attention to contexthttps://blogs.timesofisrael.com/why-history-still-matters-the-1967-six-day-war-3/Jordan is Palestine"Yasser Arafat, an Egyptian, (Rahman aka "Little Yasir" ibn Abdel Rauf al-Qudwa al-Husseini) has stated that Jordan is Palestine.Other Arab leaders, even King Hussein and Prince Hassan of Jordan, from time to time have affirmed that "Palestine is Jordan and Jordan is Palestine." Moreover, in 1970-1971, later called the "Black September" period, when King Hussein waged war against Yasser Arafat's Arab PLO forces, who had been operating freely in Jordan until then, it was considered not an invasion of foreign terrorists but a civil war. It was "a final crackdown" against those of "his people"26 whom he accused of trying to establish a separate Palestinian state, under Arab Palestinian rule instead of his own, "criminals and conspirators who use the commando movement to disguise their treasonable plots," to "destroy the unity of the Jordanian and Palestinian people."27Two states for two people, Jordan must contributeHistory of Jordan, Jordan as Palestine Two states for two people, Jordan must contribute In the most extensive remarks to date on his proposed Middle East agreement, U.S. President Bill Clinton made a plea Sunday  for peace, telling U.S. Jewish leaders their land also is the Palestinians' homeland and "there is no choice but for you to divide this land into two states for two people." --  Speech to the Israel Policy Forum, Jan 7, 2001 Yet Jordan is also Palestine.  Here are two Jordanian State Stamps one from 1964, bearing the likeness of King Hussein and pictures Mandated Palestine as an undivided territory [All of Israel of today plus Jordan of today]..., the other a 1949 stamp pictures King Abdullah of the kingdom of Jordan and bears the label of Palestine in English and Arabic. The land on which Israel was located contained only a fraction of the Palestine Mandate originally dedicated to the Jews as their homeland, incorporating the Balfour Declaration. 1 The League of Nations and the British had designated the land called "Palestine" for the "Jewish National Home" -- east and west of the Jordan River from the Mediterranean to Arabia and Iraq, and north and south from Egypt to Lebanon and Syria. 2 Historian Arnold Toynbee observed in 1918 that the "desolate" land "which lies east of the Jordan stream," 3 was capable of supporting a large population if irrigated and cultivated scientifically. ... The Zionists have as much right to this no-man's land as the Arabs, or more. Thus, the territory known variously as "Palestine," as "South Syria," as "Eastern and Western Palestine," or as part of "Turkey" had been designated by international mandate as a "Jewish National Home," concerning which the United States declared, That there be established a separate state of Palestine.... placed under Great Britain as a mandatory of the League of Nations ... that the Jews be invited to return to Palestine and settle there.... and being further assured that it will be the policy of the League of Nations to recognize Palestine as a Jewish state as soon as it is a Jewish state in fact. . . . England, as mandatory, can be relied on to give the Jews the privileged position they should have without sacrificing the [religious and property] rights of non-Jews. 4 The Arabs of that day achieved independent Arab statehood in various lands around Palestine but not within Palestine itself Sovereignty was granted after World War I to the Arabs in Syria and Iraq; in addition, Saudi Arabia consisted of approximately 865,000 square miles of territory that was designated as "purely Arab" 5 Considering all the "territories" that had been given to the Arabs, Lord Balfour "hoped" that the "small notch" of Palestine east and west of the Jordan River, which was "being given" to the Jewish people, would not be "grudged" to them by Arab leaders . 6 But, in a strategic move, the British Government apparently felt "the need to assuage the Emir's [Ahttp://www.eretzyisroel.org/~jkatz/jordan.htmlSyrian President Hafez Assad told Yasser Arafat, “Palestine is an integral part of Syria,” and Prince Hassan of the Jordanian National Assembly said, on February 2, 1970, “Palestine is Jordan and Jordan is Palestine.”PLO executive committee member, Zahir Muhsein, said, “The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel.” in short, its only purpose is to oppose Zionism and this is one of many war tactics.https://besacenter.org/perspectives-papers/palestinian-political-sclerosis/https://www.israelheartlandreport.com/news/israel-a-zionist-occupation-state?mc_cid=aedc4dc52c&mc_eid=e5ad3f4a35WATCH: 'Palestine Was Never a State, the Cause is an Illusion,' Says Arab Expert | United with Israel'Arabs have been destroying their nations for years for the sake of the Palestinian myth,' laments a Saudi writer.https://unitedwithisrael.org/watch-palestine-was-never-an-independent-state-the-cause-is-an-illusion-says-arab-expert/?utm_sourcehttps://www.mythsandfacts.org/replyonlineedition/chapter-9.htmlArticle 80 of the UN CharterThe writer is an alumnus of Harvard and UCLA. The Jewish Agency that was named in the League of Nations Mandate for Palestine had a good grasp of the history of that Mandate and its purpose.  It wrote it down for the UN Charter drafting Committee and submitted it in April 1945.  The UN Charter is dated June 24, 1945. The document it submitted was entitled MEMORANDUM SUBMITTED TO THE UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE ON INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION , SAN FRANCISCO , CALIFORNIA , BY THE JEWISH AGENCY FOR PALESTINE APRIL, 1945.  You can find it on-line at: http://www.bjpa.org/Publications/downloadFile.cfm?FileID=22125  It is part of the legislative history for Article 80 of the UN Charter.  Chaim Weizmann signed it. The Agency is named in the Mandate as the official advisor to those administering the Mandate.  The Agency describes the intent of this legal instrument as follows: "The underlying intent and purpose of this international covenant is clear and was authoritatively reaffirmed by the British Royal Commission on Palestine (1937). The declarations, as quoted by the Commission, of leading statesmen responsible for the undertaking leave no doubt that what was intended was to afford the Jewish people the right and opportunity by immigration and settlement to transform Palestine into a Jewish State. Mr. Lloyd George, Prime Minister at the time of the Declaration, was explicit to this effect and other members of the British Government at that time, including Lord Robert Cecil in 1917, Sir Herbert Samuel in 1919, and Mr. Winston Churchill in 1920, "spoke or wrote in terms that could mean only that they contemplated the eventual establishment of a Jewish State." General Smuts too, who had been a member of the Imperial War Cabinet when the Balfour Declaration  was published, speaking in November, 1919 foretold an increasing stream of Jewish immigration into Palestine and "in generations to come a great Jewish State rising there once more." "That this was also the understanding of the American Delegation at the Peace Conference appears from the Outline of Tentative Report and Recommendations prepared by the Intelligence Section of that Delegation, in accordance with instructions, for the President and Plenipotentiaries at the Peace Conference, dated January 21, 1919,which recommended: "1. That there be established a separate state of Palestine. "2. That this state be placed under Great Britain as a Mandatory of the League of Nations. "3. That the Jews be invited to return to Palestine and settle there, being assured by the Conference of all proper assistance in so doing that may be consistent with the protection of the personal (especially the religious) and property rights of the non-Jewish population, and being further assured that it will be the policy of the League of Nations to recognize Palestine as a Jewish State as soon as it is a Jewish State in fact." In line with this President Wilson on March 3, 1919 declared: "I am persuaded that the Allied Nationshttp://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/19896As per Article 80 of the UN Charter, no UN resolution can override Israel’s existing legal rights and title of sovereignty over any region of the Land of Israel based on the above earlier acts of International Law: The Jan Smuts Resolution of January 30, 1919, Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations, including the Treaty of Versailles of June 28, 1919, the San Remo Resolution of April 25, 1920, the Mandate for Palestine as confirmed on July 24, 1922 and the Franco-British Convention of December 23, 1920, all of which recognized the historical connection of the Jewish People with the Land of Israel.A Palestinian-Arab state on land lawfully designated for the Jewish state violates U.S. treaty obligations (the 1924 Anglo-American Convention/Treaty and UN Charter) guaranteeing the Jewish people’s rights to the entire mandatory area, including Judea/Samaria.It also contradicts the Oslo Accords, which, as confirmed by then-Prime Minister Yitzchak Rabin’s last speech to the Knesset, contemplated a Palestinian entity that is less than a state.Armistice Agreement of 1949http://www.knesset.gov.il/process/docs/armistice_jordan_eng.htmhttp://www.knesset.gov.il/process/docs/armistice_jordan_eng.htmArticle 69. The Armistice Demarcation Lines defined in articles V and VI of this Agreement are agreed upon by the Parties without prejudice to future territorial settlements or boundary lines or to claims of either Party relating thereto.http://www.mythsandfacts.org/Conflict/mandate_for_palestine/MandateN2%20-%2010-29-07-English.pdfNonetheless, Jordan illegally seized Judea/Samaria and the eastern portion of Jerusalem in the 1948-1949 Arab war to destroy Israel.Jordan illegally occupied these areas for the next 19 years. During that time, Jordan killed and expelled the Jews who had lived in eastern Jerusalem for centuries; destroyed 58 synagogues; erased the Jewish Quarter in the Old City of Jerusalem, violated the armistice agreements by refusing to allow Jews any access to holy Jewish religious sites; and used thousands-of-years-old Jewish gravestones to line latrines. Jordan destroyed Jewish towns and villages, factories and the hydro electric power plant. Executed Jewish prisoners of war and expelled all Jews from the Territories. Ethnic cleansing.Jordanian snipers perched in eastern Jerusalem hills to shot at Jewish children in the western part of Jerusalem.Israel recaptured Judea/Samaria and the eastern portion of Jerusalem in a defensive war in 1967.https://www.israelheartlandreport.com/news/israel-a-zionist-occupation-state?mc_cid=aedc4dc52c&mc_eid=e5ad3f4a35Further, in 2005, Israel withdrew from all of Gaza. 98% of the Palestinian Arabs now live in areas governed by the Palestinian Authority (PA); with their own Parliament, schools, textbooks, media, courts, and governing institutions.West Bank settlements not illegal, Pompeo announces in historic shiftU.S. Ambassador Friedman to ‘Post’: New policy advances the cause of Israeli-Palestinian peace • PM: Policy rights a historical wronghttps://m.jpost.com/Israel-News/West-Bank-settlements-not-illegal-US-decides-in-historic-US-policy-shift-608222https://www.israelhayom.com/opinions/the-problem-with-opposing-israels-occupation/https://www.israelhayom.com/opinions/the-problem-with-opposing-israels-occupation/The Many Incoherences and Hypocrisies of International Law on Jerusalem » MosaicThere's a quadruple standard at work: a double standard within a double standard.https://mosaicmagazine.com/response/israel-zionism/2019/07/the-many-incoherences-and-hypocrisies-of-international-law-on-jerusalem/https://www.israelhayom.com/opinions/end-which-occupation/https://www.israelhayom.com/opinions/end-which-occupation/Presidential Candidates and the Sacred Cow of ‘Occupation’US Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) at the second Democratic presidential debate in Detroit on July 30, 2019. Photo: Screnshot. Even …https://www.algemeiner.com/2019/08/21/presidential-candidates-and-the-sacred-cow-of-occupation/?utm_content=blog1&utm_medium=daily_email&utm_campaign=email&utm_source=internal/“The Occupation” – How the EU Discriminates Against IsraelWhy does the EU single out Israeli “occupation” over other “occupations”? Because anti-Israeli, pro-Palestinian positions are one of the few rallying cries that unite Europe.https://besacenter.org/perspectives-papers/eu-discrimination-israel/https://www.algemeiner.com/2019/09/13/more-human-rights-hypocrisy/?utm_content=opinion1&utm_medium=daily_email&utm_campaign=email&utm_source=internal/https://www.meforum.org/59531/is-gaza-occupied?utm_sourceJordan is Palestinehttp://tundratabloids.com/jordan-is-palestine/A Realistic Two-State SolutionThe problem with the “two-state solution”—the creation of a sovereign independent Palestinian state west of the Jordan River—is that a Palestinian state already exists east of the Jordan River. It’s called Jordan. Its population is predominantly Palestinian, and it is located in the eastern part of what was once called Palestine. Demographically and geographically, Jordan is a Palestinian state.https://besacenter.org/perspectives-papers/a-realistic-two-state-solution/Palestine pound - WikipediaPalestine pound Coinage Issued by the Palestine currency Board Image Value Technical parameters Description Date of first issue Dated years of issue Diameter Mass Composition Edge Obverse Reverse 1 mil 21 mm 3.23 g Bronze Plain "Palestine" in Arabic , English , and Hebrew , year of minting. In Hebrew; also mentions in the acronym (א״י) for Eretz Yisrael (Land of Israel). Value in Arabic , English , and Hebrew , olive sprig 1927 1927, 1935, 1937, 1939, 1940, 1941, 1942, 1943, 1944, 1946 2 mils 28 mm 7.77 g 1927, 1941, 1942, 1945, 1946 5 mils 20 mm 2.91 g Cupro-nickel Value in Arabic , English , and Hebrew 1927, 1934, 1935, 1939, 1941, 1946 5 mills 20 mm 2.9 Bronze 1942 1942, 1944 10 mils 27 mm 6.47 g Cupro-nickel 1927 1927, 1933, 1934, 1935, 1937, 1939, 1940, 1941, 1942, 1946 10 mils 27 mm 6.47 Bronze 1942 1942, 1943 20 mils 30.5 mm 11.33 g Cupro-nickel 1927 1927, 1933, 1934, 1935, 1940, 1941 20 mils 30.5 mm 11.3 Bronze 1942 1942, 1944 50 mils 23.5 mm 5.83 g 720‰ Silver Reeded "Palestine" in Arabic , English , and Hebrew , year of minting, olive sprig. In Hebrew; also mentions in the acronym (א״י) for Eretz Yisrael (Land of Israel). 1927 1927, 1931, 1933, 1934, 1935, 1939, 1940, 1942, 1943 100 mils 29 mm 11.66 g Issued by the State of Israel Image Value Technical parameters Description Date of first issue Dated years of issue Diameter Mass Composition Edge Obverse Reverse 1 pruta [12] 21 mm 1.3 g Aluminum Plain Anchor; " Israel " in Hebrew and Arabic . The design is based on a coin of Alexander Jannaeus (76-103 BCE). The denomination "1 Pruta" and the date in Hebrew ; two stylized olive branches around the rim. 25 October 1950 5709 (1949) 5 pruta 20 mm 3.2 g Bronze Four-stringed lyre; "Israel" in Hebrew and Arabic . The design is based on a coin from the Bar-Kochba Revolt (132-135CE). The denomination "5 Pruta" and the date in Hebrew ; two stylized olive branches around the rim. 28 December 1950 10 pruta 27 mm 6.1g Two-handled amphora ; "Israel" in Hebrew and Arabic. The design is based on a coin from the Bar-Kochba Revolt (132-135CE). The denomination "10 Pruta" and the date in Hebrew ; two stylized olive branches around the rim. 4 January 1950 25 mil 30 mm 3.8 g Aluminum Cluster of grapes, based on coins struck during the Bar-Kochba Revolt (132-135 CE); "Israel" in Hebrew above and in Arabic below. The denomination "25 Mil" in Hebrew and Arabic ; date in Hebrew below; two stylized olive branches around, based on coins struck during the Bar-Kochba Revolt (132-135 CE). 6 April 1949 5708 (1948), 5709 (1949) 25 pruta 19.5 mm 2.8 g Cupro-nickel Reeded Value and date in Hebrew within wreath. 4 January 1950 5709 (1949) 50 pruta 23.5 mm 5.69 g A Branch of Grape Leaves. Value and date within wreath made up of two stylized olive branches that for a circle around perimeter. 11 May 1949 100 pruta 2.4 mm 28.5 mm Date palm tree with seven branches and two bunches of dates. Country name is listed in Hebrew and Arabic . Value and date in Hebrew within wreath ofhttps://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestine_poundSettlementshttps://www.melaniephillips.com/elizabeth-warren-destruction-wests-moral-compass5607-2/https://israelforever.org/interact/blog/legal_rights_jewish_people_land_of_israel/?utm_content=Link+479538&utm_campaign=Newsletter&utm_source=History+Matters+in+our+fight+for+Truth&utm_medium=EmailLabelling the Jewish state as unequalAs Israel came under attack this week with hundreds of rockets raining down from Gaza, and as it steeled itself for even worse, the Israel-bashers were up to thhttps://www.melaniephillips.com/labelling-jewish-state-unequal/https://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-news-and-politics/294359/israels-rights-in-the-west-bank-under-international-lawhttps://honestreporting.com/jewish-claim-west-bank/https://unitedwithisrael.org/opinion-new-us-policy-on-settlements-is-a-diplomatic-turning-point/?utm_sourceFrom ZOA"In fact, U.S. treaty obligations and binding international law, including the Anglo-American Convention of 1924 and the Jewish people’s clause of the UN Charter, confirm the Jewish people’s rights to settle these lands.Jimmy Carter’s and Barrack Hussein Obama’s policies thus violated international law, and it was absolutely correct to end the Carter/Obama positions.Judea/Samaria is the holy Jewish land where our people lived and prayed for thousands of years. It is the land where Abraham purchased the cave and fields in Hebron to bury his beloved wife Sarah; and where the Maccabees fought off foreign invaders and Hellenists. It is where the shepherd David tended his flock, was anointed king, and first established his kingdom. It is where the ancient Jewish community of Hebron lived for centuries, until Arabs massacred the Jewish community in 1929. It is where the Jewish people planted the fields and cultivated our spiritual heritage."https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/11/why-the-u-s-is-right-to-recognize-west-bank-settlements-as-legal/https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wsj.com/amp/articles/pompeo-busts-the-occupation-myth-11574207220https://www.camera.org/article/political-advocacy-journalism-distorts-coverage-of-us-policy-on-settlements/http://jcpa.org/article/the-legality-of-israels-settlements/https://www.melaniephillips.com/negiotiation-war-extermination-solution-surrender/https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/in-fact-the-israeli-settlements-were-never-illegal/https://www.meforum.org/59947/the-myth-of-occupied-palestineAnswer to What was the endeavor to reclaim territory from Israel called? by Meir Sprecher Meir Sprecher's answer to What was the endeavor to reclaim territory from Israel called?https://mfa.gov.il/MFA/MFA-Archive/2003/Pages/DISPUTED%20TERRITORIES-%20Forgotten%20Facts%20About%20the%20We.aspxCamp David’s less well known agreement of Sept.1978, "A Framework for Peace in the MiddleEast", contained guidelines to establish Palestinian autonomy and a set of principles that would govern Israel’s relations with all its Arab neighbors. Exactly what this meant in political or territorial terms was left intentionally vague, its precision limited to forcing the parties to decide on a process guaranteeing full autonomy for Palestinians within a period of five years.https://m.jpost.com/Opinion/Why-President-Trump-is-keeping-the-promise-made-at-San-Remo-in-1920-612785https://besacenter.org/perspectives-papers/occupation-jewish-left/Let’s Talk About ColonialismFrom the blog of Dani Ishai Behan at The Times of Israelhttps://blogs.timesofisrael.com/lets-talk-about-colonialism/Two scribes behind 31 inscriptions discovered in biblical Samaria“If only two scribes wrote the examined Samaria texts contemporaneously and both were located in Samaria rather than in the countryside, this would indicate a palace bureaucracy at the peak of the Kingdom of Israel’s prosperity,”https://www.quora.com/q/israel-currents/Two-scribes-behind-31-inscriptions-discovered-in-biblical-Samaria?ch=10&share=8a7ea438&srid=B25Fwhttps://mailchi.mp/thelawfareproject/wh-peace-plan?e=dadfecae8cHow a Former Non-Zionist Became a Supporter of IsraelThe Israeli flag at the Western Wall in Jerusalem. Photo: Hynek Moravec via Wikimedia Commons. As a progressive, I’ve been …https://www.algemeiner.com/2020/02/14/how-a-former-non-zionist-became-a-supporter-of-israel/The History of the Land Is Jewish, Not PalestinianThe claim by the elected representatives of the Israeli Arab public that they are the original owners of the land while the Jewish citizens of Israel (and, by implication, the State of Israel itself) are “colonialist invaders” is a complete inversion of historical reality. US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s declaration about the legality of the West Bank’s Jewish communities, along with President Trump’s peace plan based on that principle, offers a unique opportunity to correct that mistaken notion by applying sovereignty to all Israeli West Bank communities.https://besacenter.org/perspectives-papers/israel-jewish-palestinian/https://www.fdd.org/analysis/2020/01/27/occupied-elsewhere/https://israelbehindthenews.com/the-1967-borders-the-kinks/19716/?utm_source=mailpoet&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ibn-todayhttps://unitedwithisrael.org/watch-former-palestinian-terrorist-debunks-lies-about-occupation/?utm_sourcehttps://www.israelhayom.com/2020/03/19/gaza-like-you-never-knew-it/Why Do Liberals Dismiss President Trump's Peace Plan Out of Hand?While it is morally right to help any community or individual unjustly persecuted or forced to live in squalor, the historical record shows that Israel did not launch the wars against it, nor inspire terrorism, nor perpetuate the multi-generationalhttps://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/15644/liberals-trump-peace-planThe Legal Foundation and Borders of Israel Under International Law by Howard Grief.https://israelforever.org/interact/blog/legal_rights_jewish_people_land_of_israel/?utm_content=Link+479538&utm_campaign=Newsletter&utm_source=History+Matters+in+our+fight+for+Truth&utm_medium=Emailhttps://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-news-and-politics/294359/israels-rights-in-the-west-bank-under-international-lawAnswer to What was the endeavor to reclaim territory from Israel called? by Meir Sprecher Meir Sprecher's answer to What was the endeavor to reclaim territory from Israel called?M. D Roberts·November 15, 2010Superb. Lays bare so much propaganda & revisionist history.This excellent detailed study by Professor Howard Grief addressing both Israel's legal foundation and borders is an absolute must read. The culmination of 25 years of study addresses a plethora of issues including the San Remo peace conference & a detailed appraisal of the Palestine Mandate, including its original intent, interpretation and application.The study pulls no punches in showing that the Balfour Declaration, Mandate and League of Nations were intent upon the rebirth of not just a Jewish national home but a Jewish state based upon a historical formula founded upon the 1st/2nd Temple period territories, including lands up to the Litani Valley in present day Lebanon. The present borders of Israel are shown to be clearly not those originally designated for the Jewish people by the aforementioned international agreements.Detailed reference reveals how it was originally agreed between Britain & France that the borders of a Jewish Palestine would be based on the historical or Biblical formula, "from Dan to Beersheba", a phrase appearing several times in the Bible.This shown to have been interpreted up until 1920 by Prime Minister Lloyd George & other British officials to mean that Palestine would include all the lands or regions historically associated with the Jewish People. That is all territory which at one time or other was conquered, settled & governed by the Israelites in the 1st /2nd Temple periods.The historical formula for determining these boundaries was accepted at the San Remo Peace Conference & referred to to in the Mandate Charter, which referred to the historical connection of the Jewish People with Palestine. The British themselves relying on George Adam Smith's "Atlas of the Historical Geography of the Holy Land", published in 1915, in particular on Plate No. 34 that depicted the territory under David and Solomon.The book makes sobering reading as the British are shown to have not abided by their obligations under the Mandate, instead giving precedence to their own political self interests, regional expedience & their relationship with the Arab/Islamic world. The influence of French interests in the region also playing a considerable part as Western entities reneged upon their responsibilities & obligations pertaining to a Jewish home/state in what was Palestine.The reader is shown how international agreements then made & still make it quite clear today, that Israel had/has a perfect legal right to settle land in the disputed territories in 1967, since this was the right assigned to the Jewish people under International Law. Law which continues to be in force despite the political nuances of today which are expedient to the larger pro-Arab international community.Self serving political machinations & expedience are again shown when, under Article 5 of the Mandate Britain - which was not allowed to partition the land - Britain then did so by severing 77% to create the Arab state of Transjordan which, from the moment of its creation, was closed to all Jewish migration and settlement - a clear betrayal of the British promise the tones of which resound even now.Under Article 6 of the Mandate Britain,was supposed to encourage Jewish immigration % settlement all over the now disputed territory - a Jewish right which exists to this day under International Law, despite the Mandate treaty's enactment in 1948.Yet Britain is shown to have reneged upon this responsibility too. British foreign policy of the time, extending to the present day, shown to be that of appeasing the Arab/Islamic world as it appears to continually sacrifice Israel upon the altar of political expedience.In November 1938 the British 'Cabinet Committee For Palestine' held a meeting which effectively resulted in the reneging upon of the Balfour Declaration & the League of Nations Mandate. Foreign Secretary, Lord Halifax, told the Committee that "the Government would have to choose between it's commitments to the world of Jewry & it's commitments to the world of Islam..." It was subsequently decided that Britain could not afford to antagonise the Muslim world. This resulted in the British White Paper of 1939 which served to appease the Arab/Islamic world & severely restricted Jewish immigration to Palestine. This was the British policy as the Holocaust descended upon the Jews of Europe.It is virtually impossible to do justice to the vast amount of evidence available in this 700+ page study. I can but highly recommend this work to anyone interesting in the Jewish state, the Arab-Israeli conflict & the manner in which the latter is portrayed/perceived in our day.With such a vast array of facts at your fingertips the individual is left to ponder a number of issues. Not least being how the international community has seemingly side-stepped history & embraced the creation of a Palestinian state in territories promised to the Jewish people & to which they have a heritage spanning many thousands of years. The prerequisite of such a state's creation being the removal/ethnic cleansing of the entire Jewish presence from these areas.With due reference to the contents of this study, the conviction that Jewish settlements in the West Bank are illegal is now so commonly accepted, it hardly seems as though the matter is even open for discussion. Such a case is blown completely out of the water by reference to the factual history. Though routinely referred to nowadays as "Palestinian" land, at no point in history has Jerusalem or the West Bank (Judea and Samaria) been under Palestinian sovereignty in any sense of the term.This compelling account (the book) shows the reader how the public is clearly being completely and utterly deceived by the manner in which the Palestinian-Israeli conflict is being presented to them (in the media), in the face of skillfully orchestrated revisionist history (meaning the “new historians") and a tidal wave of anti-Israel propaganda.This is a book that desperately needs to be read & re-read. International leaders, including those within Israel itself, need to avail themselves of the information provided here.Red Horizons by Ion Michai PacepaA former chief of Romania's foreign intelligence service reveals the extraordinary corruption of the Nicolae Ceausescu government of Romania, its brutal machinery of oppression, and its Machiavellian relationship with the West. An in side story of how Communist Party leaders really live.David Matas, Lecturer in Constitutional Law at McGill University, stated."For there to be an occupation at international law, there has to be an occupying and occupied power both of which are members of the community of nations. The only conceivable occupied power for the West Bank was Jordan. Yet Jordan has renounced all claims over the West Bank." 'Further, in 2005, Israel withdrew from all of Gaza. 98% of the Palestinian Arabs now live in areas governed by the Palestinian Authority (PA); with their own Parliament, schools, textbooks, media, courts, and governing institutions.West Bank settlements not illegal, Pompeo announces in historic shiftU.S. Ambassador Friedman to ‘Post’: New policy advances the cause of Israeli-Palestinian peace • PM: Policy rights a historical wronghttps://m.jpost.com/Israel-News/West-Bank-settlements-not-illegal-US-decides-in-historic-US-policy-shift-608222https://www.israelhayom.com/opinions/the-problem-with-opposing-israels-occupation/https://www.israelhayom.com/opinions/the-problem-with-opposing-israels-occupation/The Many Incoherences and Hypocrisies of International Law on Jerusalem » MosaicThere's a quadruple standard at work: a double standard within a double standard.https://mosaicmagazine.com/response/israel-zionism/2019/07/the-many-incoherences-and-hypocrisies-of-international-law-on-jerusalem/https://www.israelhayom.com/opinions/end-which-occupation/https://www.israelhayom.com/opinions/end-which-occupation/Presidential Candidates and the Sacred Cow of ‘Occupation’US Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) at the second Democratic presidential debate in Detroit on July 30, 2019. Photo: Screnshot. Even …https://www.algemeiner.com/2019/08/21/presidential-candidates-and-the-sacred-cow-of-occupation/?utm_content=blog1&utm_medium=daily_email&utm_campaign=email&utm_source=internal/“The Occupation” – How the EU Discriminates Against IsraelWhy does the EU single out Israeli “occupation” over other “occupations”? Because anti-Israeli, pro-Palestinian positions are one of the few rallying cries that unite Europe.https://besacenter.org/perspectives-papers/eu-discrimination-israel/https://www.algemeiner.com/2019/09/13/more-human-rights-hypocrisy/?utm_content=opinion1&utm_medium=daily_email&utm_campaign=email&utm_source=internal/https://www.meforum.org/59531/is-gaza-occupied?utm_source=Middle+East+Forum&utm_campaign=fabac90761-MEF_Mainen_2019_10_08_11_36&utm_mediumJordan is Palestinehttp://tundratabloids.com/jordan-is-palestine/A Realistic Two-State SolutionThe problem with the “two-state solution”—the creation of a sovereign independent Palestinian state west of the Jordan River—is that a Palestinian state already exists east of the Jordan River. It’s called Jordan. Its population is predominantly Palestinian, and it is located in the eastern part of what was once called Palestine. Demographically and geographically, Jordan is a Palestinian state.https://besacenter.org/perspectives-papers/a-realistic-two-state-solution/Palestine pound - WikipediaPalestine pound Coinage Issued by the Palestine currency Board Image Value Technical parameters Description Date of first issue Dated years of issue Diameter Mass Composition Edge Obverse Reverse 1 mil 21 mm 3.23 g Bronze Plain "Palestine" in Arabic , English , and Hebrew , year of minting. In Hebrew; also mentions in the acronym (א״י) for Eretz Yisrael (Land of Israel). Value in Arabic , English , and Hebrew , olive sprig 1927 1927, 1935, 1937, 1939, 1940, 1941, 1942, 1943, 1944, 1946 2 mils 28 mm 7.77 g 1927, 1941, 1942, 1945, 1946 5 mils 20 mm 2.91 g Cupro-nickel Value in Arabic , English , and Hebrew 1927, 1934, 1935, 1939, 1941, 1946 5 mills 20 mm 2.9 Bronze 1942 1942, 1944 10 mils 27 mm 6.47 g Cupro-nickel 1927 1927, 1933, 1934, 1935, 1937, 1939, 1940, 1941, 1942, 1946 10 mils 27 mm 6.47 Bronze 1942 1942, 1943 20 mils 30.5 mm 11.33 g Cupro-nickel 1927 1927, 1933, 1934, 1935, 1940, 1941 20 mils 30.5 mm 11.3 Bronze 1942 1942, 1944 50 mils 23.5 mm 5.83 g 720‰ Silver Reeded "Palestine" in Arabic , English , and Hebrew , year of minting, olive sprig. In Hebrew; also mentions in the acronym (א״י) for Eretz Yisrael (Land of Israel). 1927 1927, 1931, 1933, 1934, 1935, 1939, 1940, 1942, 1943 100 mils 29 mm 11.66 g Issued by the State of Israel Image Value Technical parameters Description Date of first issue Dated years of issue Diameter Mass Composition Edge Obverse Reverse 1 pruta [12] 21 mm 1.3 g Aluminum Plain Anchor; " Israel " in Hebrew and Arabic . The design is based on a coin of Alexander Jannaeus (76-103 BCE). The denomination "1 Pruta" and the date in Hebrew ; two stylized olive branches around the rim. 25 October 1950 5709 (1949) 5 pruta 20 mm 3.2 g Bronze Four-stringed lyre; "Israel" in Hebrew and Arabic . The design is based on a coin from the Bar-Kochba Revolt (132-135CE). The denomination "5 Pruta" and the date in Hebrew ; two stylized olive branches around the rim. 28 December 1950 10 pruta 27 mm 6.1g Two-handled amphora ; "Israel" in Hebrew and Arabic. The design is based on a coin from the Bar-Kochba Revolt (132-135CE). The denomination "10 Pruta" and the date in Hebrew ; two stylized olive branches around the rim. 4 January 1950 25 mil 30 mm 3.8 g Aluminum Cluster of grapes, based on coins struck during the Bar-Kochba Revolt (132-135 CE); "Israel" in Hebrew above and in Arabic below. The denomination "25 Mil" in Hebrew and Arabic ; date in Hebrew below; two stylized olive branches around, based on coins struck during the Bar-Kochba Revolt (132-135 CE). 6 April 1949 5708 (1948), 5709 (1949) 25 pruta 19.5 mm 2.8 g Cupro-nickel Reeded Value and date in Hebrew within wreath. 4 January 1950 5709 (1949) 50 pruta 23.5 mm 5.69 g A Branch of Grape Leaves. Value and date within wreath made up of two stylized olive branches that for a circle around perimeter. 11 May 1949 100 pruta 2.4 mm 28.5 mm Date palm tree with seven branches and two bunches of dates. Country name is listed in Hebrew and Arabic . Value and date in Hebrew within wreath ofhttps://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestine_poundSettlementshttps://www.melaniephillips.com/elizabeth-warren-destruction-wests-moral-compass5607-2/https://israelforever.org/interact/blog/legal_rights_jewish_people_land_of_israel/?utm_content=Link+479538&utm_campaign=Newsletter&utm_sourceIsrael: The Settlements Are Not IllegalIndigenous peoples have the right to the lands, territories and resources which they have traditionally owned, occupied or otherwise used or acquired (Art. 26.1) and that the exercise of these rights shall be free from discrimination of any kind (Art. 2)https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/16032/israel-settlements-not-illegalLabelling the Jewish state as unequalAs Israel came under attack this week with hundreds of rockets raining down from Gaza, and as it steeled itself for even worse, the Israel-bashers were up to thhttps://www.melaniephillips.com/labelling-jewish-state-unequal/https://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-news-and-politics/294359/israels-rights-in-the-west-bank-under-international-lawhttps://honestreporting.com/jewish-claim-west-bank/https://unitedwithisrael.org/opinion-new-us-policy-on-settlements-is-a-diplomatic-turning-point/?utm_sourceFrom ZOA"In fact, U.S. treaty obligations and binding international law, including the Anglo-American Convention of 1924 and the Jewish people’s clause of the UN Charter, confirm the Jewish people’s rights to settle these lands.Jimmy Carter’s and Barrack Hussein Obama’s policies thus violated international law, and it was absolutely correct to end the Carter/Obama positions.Judea/Samaria is the holy Jewish land where our people lived and prayed for thousands of years. It is the land where Abraham purchased the cave and fields in Hebron to bury his beloved wife Sarah; and where the Maccabees fought off foreign invaders and Hellenists. It is where the shepherd David tended his flock, was anointed king, and first established his kingdom. It is where the ancient Jewish community of Hebron lived for centuries, until Arabs massacred the Jewish community in 1929. It is where the Jewish people planted the fields and cultivated our spiritual heritage."https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/11/why-the-u-s-is-right-to-recognize-west-bank-settlements-as-legal/https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wsj.com/amp/articles/pompeo-busts-the-occupation-myth-11574207220https://www.camera.org/article/political-advocacy-journalism-distorts-coverage-of-us-policy-on-settlements/http://jcpa.org/article/the-legality-of-israels-settlements/https://www.melaniephillips.com/negiotiation-war-extermination-solution-surrender/https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/in-fact-the-israeli-settlements-were-never-illegal/https://www.meforum.org/59947/the-myth-of-occupied-palestineAnswer to What was the endeavor to reclaim territory from Israel called? by Meir Sprecher Meir Sprecher's answer to What was the endeavor to reclaim territory from Israel called?https://mfa.gov.il/MFA/MFA-Archive/2003/Pages/DISPUTED%20TERRITORIES-%20Forgotten%20Facts%20About%20the%20We.aspxCamp David’s less well known agreement of Sept.1978, "A Framework for Peace in the MiddleEast", contained guidelines to establish Palestinian autonomy and a set of principles that would govern Israel’s relations with all its Arab neighbors. Exactly what this meant in political or territorial terms was left intentionally vague, its precision limited to forcing the parties to decide on a process guaranteeing full autonomy for Palestinians within a period of five years.https://m.jpost.com/Opinion/Why-President-Trump-is-keeping-the-promise-made-at-San-Remo-in-1920-612785https://besacenter.org/perspectives-papers/occupation-jewish-left/Let’s Talk About ColonialismFrom the blog of Dani Ishai Behan at The Times of Israelhttps://blogs.timesofisrael.com/lets-talk-about-colonialism/Two scribes behind 31 inscriptions discovered in biblical Samaria“If only two scribes wrote the examined Samaria texts contemporaneously and both were located in Samaria rather than in the countryside, this would indicate a palace bureaucracy at the peak of the Kingdom of Israel’s prosperity,”https://www.quora.com/q/israel-currents/Two-scribes-behind-31-inscriptions-discovered-in-biblical-Samaria?ch=10&share=8a7ea438&srid=B25Fwhttps://mailchi.mp/thelawfareproject/wh-peace-plan?e=dadfecae8cHow a Former Non-Zionist Became a Supporter of IsraelThe Israeli flag at the Western Wall in Jerusalem. Photo: Hynek Moravec via Wikimedia Commons. As a progressive, I’ve been …https://www.algemeiner.com/2020/02/14/how-a-former-non-zionist-became-a-supporter-of-israel/The History of the Land Is Jewish, Not PalestinianThe claim by the elected representatives of the Israeli Arab public that they are the original owners of the land while the Jewish citizens of Israel (and, by implication, the State of Israel itself) are “colonialist invaders” is a complete inversion of historical reality. US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s declaration about the legality of the West Bank’s Jewish communities, along with President Trump’s peace plan based on that principle, offers a unique opportunity to correct that mistaken notion by applying sovereignty to all Israeli West Bank communities.https://besacenter.org/perspectives-papers/israel-jewish-palestinian/https://www.fdd.org/analysis/2020/01/27/occupied-elsewhere/https://israelbehindthenews.com/the-1967-borders-the-kinks/19716/?utm_sourcehttps://unitedwithisrael.org/watch-former-palestinian-terrorist-debunks-lies-about-occupation/?utm_sourcehttps://www.israelhayom.com/2020/03/19/gaza-like-you-never-knew-it/Why Do Liberals Dismiss President Trump's Peace Plan Out of Hand?While it is morally right to help any community or individual unjustly persecuted or forced to live in squalor, the historical record shows that Israel did not launch the wars against it, nor inspire terrorism, nor perpetuate the multi-generationalhttps://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/15644/liberals-trump-peace-planIsrael: Not a European colonyFrom the blog of Sherry Sufi at The Times of Israelhttps://blogs.timesofisrael.com/israel-not-a-european-colony/Right of return. Myth.https://quillette.com/2020/04/28/the-war-of-return-a-review/Regarding the use of the term Annexation:https://www.jns.org/for-israel-to-give-up-its-heartland-is-like-the-us-giving-up-the-statue-of-liberty/Please note that Israel has no need to annex Judea and Samaria liberated in a defensive war in 1967 from Jordanian occupation.These Territories were designated by the League of Nations and ratified by 51 States as the historical ancestral indigenous Homeland of the Jewish people.The illegal occupation of the “West Bank" by Jordan ceased to exist in 1967.https://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/may/19/israels-daunting-decision-on-drawing-permanent-bor/Israel, the EU, and International Law | National ReviewIf the EU tries to present its cynical political calculations regarding annexations as upholding international law, there are a few things EU members need to learn.https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/05/european-union-israel-eu-presents-cynical-political-calculations-as-rule-of-law/"Annexation” is a misnomer for Israel’s lawful exercise of her sovereignty rights that were guaranteed to the Jewish people to re-establish the Jewish homeland 100 years ago, at the San Remo Conference and under the Mandate for Palestine.I'm disgusted with the blatant hypocrisy and double standards of the international community constantly directed against Israel.The status of the territories in question is a subject of major debate in international law, and Israel’s claims are no less legitimate than anyone else’s.https://www.algemeiner.com/2020/06/10/settlements-and-sovereignty/Annexation vs. Sovereignty: Words MatterView of Ma’aleh Adumim in Judea and Samaria on Jan. 1, 2017. Photo: Yaniv Nadav/Flash90. JNS.org – Words matter. They drive …https://www.algemeiner.com/2020/06/09/annexation-vs-sovereignty-words-matter/Language As an Anti-Israel ToolIsrael has largely ignored the war of words against it. This includes malicious terms such as “apartheid” and ”occupation,” as well as anti-Israel phrases like “land for peace” and “two-state solution.” The UN’s falsely calling descendants of Palestinians who fled during the 1948 war “refugees” is another example. Well before any new negotiations take place with the Palestinians, the issue of Palestinian incitement as part of their cult of the glorification of genocide and death should be put on the international agenda.https://besacenter.org/perspectives-papers/anti-israel-language/Myths about Sovereignty AssertionCritics say attaining sovereignty will undermine the peace process and ruin Israel's reputation abroad, but these myths do not hold up to scrutiny.https://davidmweinberg.com/2020/07/03/myths-about-sovereignty-assertion/The Economic Potential of Sovereignty Application - JISSWhen Israel declares sovereignty in the Jordan Valley and the Jerusalem Envelope, this must be accompanied by significant economic development and construction.https://jiss.org.il/en/gvirtzman-the-economic-potential-of-sovereignty-application/Opinion | The Middle East’s Dual ‘Occupations’The Israel-Morocco peace deal underscores a double standard on the West Bank versus Western Sahara.https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-middle-easts-dual-occupations-11608247133Israel, the EU, and International Law | National ReviewIf the EU tries to present its cynical political calculations regarding annexations as upholding international law, there are a few things EU members need to learn.https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/05/european-union-israel-eu-presents-cynical-political-calculations-as-rule-of-law/Washington Post Amnesia on Israel and ‘Annexation’The former Washington Post building. Photo: Wikimedia Commons. JNS.org – “History,” the late historian Bernard Lewis wrote, “is the collective …https://www.algemeiner.com/2020/06/21/washington-post-amnesia-on-israel-and-annexation/An annexation that isn't - British Jewry loses the plotannexation? Some British Jews demand everyone do what they want them to do. If not, they won't love Israel anymore. Oh please. I wish they'd just grow uphttp://david-collier.com/annexation-british-jewry/WATCH: 'We support Israeli annexation,' says Saudi journalist'We support Israeli annexation' says Saudi journalist Abdulhameed Al-Ghobain, 'because the Palestinians have lost many opportunities and have no more cards to play.'https://worldisraelnews.com/watch-we-support-israeli-annexation-says-saudi-journalist/?utm_sourceArab leaders threaten Israel relentlessly over annexation, but average Arabs who are sick and tired of their corrupt leaders and are singing a different tune.Applying Israel LawsThe right to sovereignty - OpedsIt is time for the people of Israel to apply sovereignty over the land to which they have historic ties to and is their true, promised, homeland. Many in the world are quick to provide reasons why it is appropriate to reject and even postpone the application of Israeli sovereignty to the territories of the ancestral land. Among them are those "exilic Jews,” who have seemingly lost their deep affinity for Israeli heritage and long-held belief in Zionism, and are paralyzed by the fear of what the Gentiles might think. Some of them will disguise this sentiment with statements expressing their concern that it would hurt the relationship with both Israel’s immediate and distant environments, albeit the latter has never truly demonstrated either deep understanding of, or affection for, the Jews. Some will insist that first, "staff work must be completed and explored," as if it has not yet been done, as if there is no justification and such a move would require proof. The Arabs at home and abroad would prefer that the State of Israel cease to exist as a Jewish state in the Land of Israel, regardless of their sovereignty over one piece of land or another. The hypocritical Europeans are terrified of the Arabs, only now beginning to realize that they themselves are losing sovereignty over their own countries in the face of an increase in “muscle-flexing” and civil insubordination on the part of the immigrants, most of them Arabs and Muslims, who do not really like Jews and even less - Christian infidels, whether they are anti-Semitic, neo-Nazi or just liberal democrats. In this article, I would like to make clear that the government is now urgently required to apply sovereignty, something that should have been accomplished 53 years ago, after the liberation of Judea, Samaria & the Jordan Valley from the Arab-Jordanian occupation. I would like to prove to those generals, politicians and experts, who have endless excuses for rejecting a good idea and a brave opportunity, insisting that instead they need to deepen their groundwork, establish a professional and independent committee, assure that they will prioritize and deal with the issue in person when the time is right, that continuing to postpone is a means of displaying weakness and demonstrates an inability to take courageous, demanding and determined action. With three examples, I will demonstrate the need to establish sovereignty now, stemming from the natural right of the Jewish people to territories in Judea, Samaria and the Jordan Valley: Gush Etzion - Israeli settlement bloc Whereas Gush Etzion was under the control of the people of Israel until their expulsion from their homeland some 2000 years ago at the time of the destruction of the Temple, and there is a great deal of archaeological evidence that there has been a significant Jewish presence there for quite some time, as well as documentation in the holy scripture, various books and writings; Whereas the land of Gush Etzion was legally purchashttp://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/283502HR International LawsOn the matter of Jewish sovereignty, everybody should settle downTwo nuclear powers, China and India face off and the world yawns. Israel states it will apply sovereignty over areas of Jueda and everyone loses the plot.http://david-collier.com/sovereignty/ICCs lack of jurisdiction over so called situation in Palestine 17 June 2020JavaScript must be enabled in order to view this page.https://mfa.gov.il/MFA/PressRoom/2020/Pages/ICCs-lack-of-jurisdiction-over-so-called-situation-in-Palestine-17-June-2020.aspxMaps of IsraelLevy Report - WikipediaPalestinian National Authority Edit Nabil Abu Rudaineh, a spokesperson for Palestinian National Authority President Mahmoud Abbas , dismissed the report and called on Israel to stop settlement activities if it is interested in reaching peace. [15] Palestinian officials also noted that the Levy Report was published on the anniversary of the 2004 International Court of Justice ′s advisory opinion which determined that Israel’s construction of its separation barrier across the Green Line in the West Bank violates international law. [3] Al Fatah , the PLO ′s largest faction headed by Mahmoud Abbas, reportedly issued a statement calling the Levy committee’s conclusions a "farce" that "mocked and defied the international community". [3] In a press release of 18 October 2012, Saeb Erekat , chief Palestinian negotiator, stated that "the Levy Report simply reflects the position of a government that has chosen to turn occupation into annexation and to impose an Apartheid reality in Palestine rather than taking steps to make peace possible". [16] Political reactions in Israel Edit Prime Minister Netanyahu praised the report, saying: "In my opinion, this report is important because it deals with the legalization and the legitimization of the settlement enterprise in Judea and Samaria on the basis of facts, a variety of facts and arguments that should be seriously considered", adding that the Ministerial Committee on Settlements would debate and decide the matter. [12] By the time the Knesset dissolved in October 2012 following the call for early elections in January 2013 , Netanyahu had not brought the report before the cabinet or the Ministerial Settlements Committee, which would have the power to approve it. Attorney-General Yehuda Weinstein reportedly had issued a general directive asking ministries not to make major policy decisions until the next government is sworn in, without specifically mentioning the Levy Report. [17] Foreign Minister Avigdor Liberman said he welcomes the report, and hopes the cabinet approves it, adding that "it's not perfect, but it's an important step". [4] Environmental Protection Minister Gilad Erdan said he "will work to ensure the government adopts the report’s conclusion and give a clear future and stability for tens of thousands of families after dozens of years," adding "finally, legal and historic justice has been done, following the twister political stances based on the Meretz activist Talia Sasson's report". [4] Interior Minister Eli Yishai praised the report, saying “the time has come to fix the injustice of the Talia Sasson Report and say openly that settlements in Judea and Samaria do not contradict the law, and complement the spirit of Zionism and Judaism". [4] Science and Technology Minister Daniel Herschkowitz called on Netanyahu to immediately convene the Ministerial Committee on Settlements to adopt the report, which "proves the Sasson report was political from the start to the end". [4] Public Diplomacy Minishttps://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levy_ReportThe Law of Annexation: What's Right and What's Wrong?On June 10 a web site called opiniojuris.org circulated an article entitled An Open Letter to the Israeli Government,  which claims that Israel's plans tohttps://honestreporting.com/the-legality-of-annexation-whats-right-and-whats-wrong/The Law of Annexation: What’s Right and What’s Wrong?Houses are seen in the Israeli settlement of Itamar, near Nablus, in the West Bank, June 15, 2020. Photo: Reuters …https://www.algemeiner.com/2020/06/22/the-law-of-annexation-whats-right-and-whats-wrong/The great myth of Israeli annexationThe Jewish state is not about to march across any border or claim even an inch of new territory. To the contrary, its footprint in Judea and Samaria will remain exactly the same.https://www.jns.org/opinion/the-great-myth-of-israeli-annexation/Opinion | Don’t Buy the ‘Annexation’ HypeApplying Israeli civilian law to West Bank settlements wouldn’t preclude peace or violate Palestinian rights.https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wsj.com/amp/articles/dont-buy-the-annexation-hype-11592932454ZOA Strongly Supports Israel Applying Sovereignty to Judea and Samaria and the Jordan Valley ImmediatelyIt’s the Law International law provides for Israeli sovereignty over Judea and Samaria and the Jordan Valley. These laws include the San Remo resolution, Lehttps://zoa.org/2020/06/10440664-zoa-strongly-supports-israel-applying-sovereignty-to-judea-and-samaria-and-the-jordan-valley-immediately/Palestine, UTI POSSIDETIS JURIS, and the borders of IsraelAbraham Bell* & Eugene Kontorovichhttps://arizonalawreview.org/pdf/58-3/58arizlrev633.pdfLance Forman on Territories100 legal scholars say Israel's sovereignty plan perfectly squares with international law'It is illegitimate and intellectually dishonest to predetermine the lawfulness of a policy by simply ignoring one side’s claims,' the legal scholars said in a letter.https://worldisraelnews.com/100-legal-eagles-say-israels-sovereignty-plan-perfectly-squares-with-international-law/When someone shows the picture of how Israel-Palestine territory has changed over time, how legit and realistic is it?My way of resisting antisemitism - debunking the libels and pointing out the double standards.https://www.quora.com/q/resistingantisemitism/When-someone-shows-the-picture-of-how-Israel-Palestine-territory-has-changed-over-time-how-legit-and-realistic-is-it?ch=10&share=f0550091&srid=B25FwNo occupation nor AnnexationLawfare Project educates foreign ministers on "annexation"In these letters, we urged the foreign ministers to retract their declarations and, instead, stand with Israel in its efforts to build a reunified state. You may have seen that we also recently warned U.S. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi that punitive measures against Israel in the event of reunification could violate our nation's laws. As the legal arm of the Jewish and pro-Israel community, we are fighting a fundamental injustice: the false narrative that skews history and the law to deny the Jewish people their sovereign rights over all of Israel. None of this would be possible without supporters like you. Thank you for helping The Lawfare Project combat misinformation and false narratives, and advance Jewish rights. We appreciate your commitment to this vital cause. Sincerely, Brooke Goldstein Executive Director, The Lawfare Projecthttps://mailchi.mp/thelawfareproject/lp-foreign-ministers?e=dadfecae8c"The State of Israel was not established as a colonizing entity in place of an Arab state. Rather, it was established as a fruit of decolonization of the former Turkish Ottoman Empire together with other independence movements in the region in the 20th century. Israel always intended to exist together in peace with an Arab state in the area of Mandatory Palestine. This constitutes a founding principle of Israel's Declaration of Independence."How to Dismantle the Distorted Western Discourse on IsraelRadical extremists cloak their anti-Israel and anti-Semitic messages with revolutionary jargon - How to Dismantle the Distorted Western Discourse on Israel - Alan Bakerhttps://jcpa.org/article/how-to-dismantle-the-distorted-western-discourse-on-israel/Irish Times Falls for Palestinian Maps Lie | Honest Reporting  The history of the Holy Land, its people and borders over the last century is among the most complicated in the world, but there are always somehttps://honestreporting.com/irish-times-falls-for-palestinian-maps-lie/Israel’s 2 top int’l law officials take on ICC: Is Gaza ‘occupied’?Confronting delegitimization of IDF conduct in Gaza, the blockade and closureshttps://m.jpost.com/arab-israeli-conflict/israels-2-top-intl-law-officials-take-on-icc-is-gaza-occupied-653894US to extend bilateral agreements with Israel into Judea and Samaria, GolanThe upcoming signing will expand scientific and academic cooperation between Israel and the United States into the disputed territories.https://www.jns.org/us-israel-to-sign-agreement-with-no-territorial-restrictions-for-future-deals/?utm_sourceWhen the UK returns Gibraltar to the Spanish, the Falklands to Argentina, NZ to the Maoris and Australia to the Aboriginals, then you can ask us again about international laws.Same goes for Russia and Cremes, China and Tibet, Morocco and Western Sahara, Turkey and Cyprus, Spain and Ceuta, France and the Pacific Islands, US and Hawaii and the list is endless.

Here below is just one example how terms are used by the media which are totally false.There are endless examples.You are welcome to read this part:The term “occupation” is a fallacious Orwellian myth, because “occupation” means that the “occupier” stole another state’s sovereign land.The land of Israel aka the Promised Land or also known as the Holy Land has been the historical, ancestral indigenous Homeland of the Jewish people for over 3 millennium.The Jewish people never left their country even with several Expulsions of part of the population.Understanding Jewish Indigeneity to IsraelA worshiper walks in front of the Dome of the Rock in the compound known to Muslims as the Noble …https://www.algemeiner.com/2021/03/05/understanding-jewish-indigeneity-to-israel/Jewish settlements historyNew Map Reveals Truth About 'Occupation' in the Land of Israel | United with IsraelAn Israeli researcher combats false claims that Arabs are indigenous to the Land of Israel and reasserts the truth that this land historically belonged to the Jewish people.https://unitedwithisrael.org/new-map-reveals-truth-about-occupation-in-the-land-of-israel/Historical Proof of Jewish Continuity in IsraelWorshipers pray in distance from each other at the Western Wall in Jerusalem’s Old City, amid coronavirus restrictions, March 26, …https://www.algemeiner.com/2020/09/30/historical-proof-of-jewish-continuity-in-israel/When Israel liberated Judea/Samaria in a defensive war in 1967, it was no one’s sovereign land. It was illegally occupied by Jordan from 1948-67.There was never a Palestinian state in Israel, Judea/Samaria (a.k.a. the West Bank) and/or Jerusalem.There was never a Palestinian State, no Palestinian Kings and Queens. No Palesinian history, language nor archeology.There are no "Palestinian" archeological artifacts in any of the world's finest museums.In fact, Judea/Samaria and the eastern portion of Jerusalem were and are land lawfully designated for the Jewish state under the Mandate and International Law, without mentioning here the historical, Biblical, ancestral connection of the indigenous Jewish people to the land.Palestinians: What is Fact, What is FictionA look at Palestinians, the legitimacy of their claims vs the Jews by looking at historical, archaeological, census and eyewitness accounts.https://news.0censor.com/palestinians-historical-claims/Even archeology attests to these facts:Ancient Muslim Texts Confirm the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem | Jerusalem Center for Public AffairsJerusalem Center researcher Nadav Shragai responds to modern-day Muslim and Palestinian fabrications about the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem with thehttps://jcpa.org/ancient-muslim-texts-confirm-the-jewish-temple-in-jerusalem/This West Bank Land Is Not ‘Palestinian’The community of Beit El in Judea and Samaria. Photo: Wikimedia Commons. “Who can challenge the rights of the Jews …https://www.algemeiner.com/2020/08/24/this-west-bank-land-is-not-palestinian/There is no legally recognized independent State of Palestine:Member Stateshttps://www.un.org/en/member-states/index.htmlThe UN classifies the Palestinians as having “non-Member Observer State status.”https://www.un.org/en/sections/member-states/non-member-states/index.htmlPalestinian Myths and Israeli RealitiesIllustrative. Photo: Reuters / Ammar Awad. I like to deal in truth and reality, so here are some facts: Israel …https://www.algemeiner.com/2020/05/20/palestinian-myths-and-israeli-realities/See Encyclopedia Britannica 11th editionThe Encyclopaedia Britannica : a dictionary of arts, sciences, literature and general information / [Hugh Chisholm, editor]. v. 20.Toggle Options Options Optionshttps://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=uc1.b2900093&view=1up&seq=658"Under the Ottoman jurisdiction, Palestine has no independent existence. West of the Jordan, and to about half-way between Nablus and Jerusalem, is the southern portion of the vilayet or province of Beirut. South of this point is the Sanjak of Jerusalem. Nazareth with its immediate neighborhood is added, so as to bring all the principal holy places under one jurisdiction. East of the Jordan the country forms part of the larger vilayet of Syria, whose centre is Damascus."As we see in the description in the Encyclopedia, nationalities and countries represented in “Palestine” at the time included Bedouin, Arabs, Nowar, Armenians, Greeks, Italians, Jews, Turkomen, Persians, Afghanis, Mutawila, Kurds, Germans, Circassians, Turks, Sudanese and Algerians.But no “Palestinians-”To summarize this point, on the ground there was no administrative political jurisdiction called “Palestine.”The ruling Ottoman power was blind to the existence of such a territory. To the Caliphate in Constantinople the Ottoman maps show provinces (Vilayet) and administrative districts (Sanjak), with no relation to then Palestine.At the UN Security Council on 31.5.1956, Ahmad Shuqairy, Deputy Secretary-General of the Arab League, testified on the agenda item still called the “Palestine Question” said, as Haj Amin had been saying since the Peace Conference of 1919, that:“it's common knowledge that Palestine is nothing but southern Syria.”The Arab League of States he represented remained adamant that there was no such country as Palestine.The above documents are under embargo.Hum, I wonder why?(In 1964, Shuqairy was appointed the first leader of a new organization called the PLO).https://daccess-ods.un.org/access.nsf/Get?OpenAgent&DS=S/RES/113(1956)&Lang=Ehttps://daccess-ods.un.org/access.nsf/Get?OpenAgent&DS=S/RES/113(1956)&Lang=EHence, it is impossible for Israel to be an “occupier” of “Palestinian” land.Who Owns the Land?It never stops: Europeans complain about Israel building things, or rather, about Israelis planning to build things. Such activities, they claim are illegal, because according to them nothing east of the 1949 armistice line belongs to Israel. But to whom does it really belong? A starting point is the question that the blogger who calls himself Elder of Ziyon asked in a tweet the other day: “what country was legitimately sovereign in Judea and Samaria on the day prior to the start of the 1967 war?” Jordan illegally occupied the territory in 1948, when it was one of five Arab countries that invaded the area of the former British Mandate in order to try to prevent the Jews from creating a sovereign state there (and indeed, to try to kill and drive out the Jews from the land). In 1950 it (again illegally) annexed the area and named it the “West Bank.” This aggression clearly violated the UN charter, and in the 19 years that Jordan held it, only two nations (Britain and Pakistan) recognized its purported ownership. Incidentally, the Jordanians committed numerous war crimes during their conquest and occupation, starting with the violent ethnic cleansing of its Jewish inhabitants, and including the deliberate destruction of synagogues and the refusal to allow Jews and Christians to visit their holy sites in Jerusalem – something Jordan had agreed to in the cease-fire agreements. For several reasons, Israel’s claim in 1967 was stronger than that of Jordan’s. One is that the beneficiary of the Mandate is the Jewish people; it refers to the creation of a “Jewish Home” and not an Arab one. It is also reasonable to understand the “home” as being a state, although probably the British envisioned it as more like a protectorate within their empire. And an Arab state (Jordan) had already been created in part of it. Another argument is the doctrine of uti possidetis juris , which holds that new sovereign states resulting from decolonization get the same boundaries as the former colonial entities ( an article explaining the application to Israel is here ). The doctrine is intended to prevent the creation of “no-man’s lands” which could become the source of conflict – as indeed this area has! I haven’t mentioned the 1947 UN partition resolution for an important reason: it is irrelevant to international law. As a General Assembly resolution, it was only a recommendation; and since the Arabs immediately rejected it, it was never implemented. It did express the will of the majority of UN members at the time that a Jewish (and Arab) state could be created in the area between the Jordan and the Mediterranean, but it had no binding force. Finally, there is the argument for the rights of the oldest extant indigenous people – the aboriginal inhabitants. The Ottomans controlled the land for 400 years. Before that there was a succession of foreign rulers all the way back to the last Jewish commonwealth in Judea, the Hasmonean Dynasty which lasted for about 80 years around 10http://abuyehuda.com/2020/08/who-owns-the-land/Short historical summaryBank of Palestine was a Jewish bank with Jewish currencies and coinsPalestine pound - WikipediaPalestine pound Coinage Issued by the Palestine currency Board Image Value Technical parameters Description Date of first issue Dated years of issue Diameter Mass Composition Edge Obverse Reverse 1 mil 21 mm 3.23 g Bronze Plain "Palestine" in Arabic , English , and Hebrew , year of minting. In Hebrew; also mentions in the acronym (א״י) for Eretz Yisrael (Land of Israel). Value in Arabic , English , and Hebrew , olive sprig 1927 1927, 1935, 1937, 1939, 1940, 1941, 1942, 1943, 1944, 1946 2 mils 28 mm 7.77 g 1927, 1941, 1942, 1945, 1946 5 mils 20 mm 2.91 g Cupro-nickel Value in Arabic , English , and Hebrew 1927, 1934, 1935, 1939, 1941, 1946 5 mills 20 mm 2.9 Bronze 1942 1942, 1944 10 mils 27 mm 6.47 g Cupro-nickel 1927 1927, 1933, 1934, 1935, 1937, 1939, 1940, 1941, 1942, 1946 10 mils 27 mm 6.47 Bronze 1942 1942, 1943 20 mils 30.5 mm 11.33 g Cupro-nickel 1927 1927, 1933, 1934, 1935, 1940, 1941 20 mils 30.5 mm 11.3 Bronze 1942 1942, 1944 50 mils 23.5 mm 5.83 g 720‰ Silver Reeded "Palestine" in Arabic , English , and Hebrew , year of minting, olive sprig. In Hebrew; also mentions in the acronym (א״י) for Eretz Yisrael (Land of Israel). 1927 1927, 1931, 1933, 1934, 1935, 1939, 1940, 1942, 1943 100 mils 29 mm 11.66 g Issued by the State of Israel Image Value Technical parameters Description Date of first issue Dated years of issue Diameter Mass Composition Edge Obverse Reverse 1 pruta [12] 21 mm 1.3 g Aluminum Plain Anchor; " Israel " in Hebrew and Arabic . The design is based on a coin of Alexander Jannaeus (76-103 BCE). The denomination "1 Pruta" and the date in Hebrew ; two stylized olive branches around the rim. 25 October 1950 5709 (1949) 5 pruta 20 mm 3.2 g Bronze Four-stringed lyre; "Israel" in Hebrew and Arabic . The design is based on a coin from the Bar-Kochba Revolt (132-135CE). The denomination "5 Pruta" and the date in Hebrew ; two stylized olive branches around the rim. 28 December 1950 10 pruta 27 mm 6.1g Two-handled amphora ; "Israel" in Hebrew and Arabic. The design is based on a coin from the Bar-Kochba Revolt (132-135CE). The denomination "10 Pruta" and the date in Hebrew ; two stylized olive branches around the rim. 4 January 1950 25 mil 30 mm 3.8 g Aluminum Cluster of grapes, based on coins struck during the Bar-Kochba Revolt (132-135 CE); "Israel" in Hebrew above and in Arabic below. The denomination "25 Mil" in Hebrew and Arabic ; date in Hebrew below; two stylized olive branches around, based on coins struck during the Bar-Kochba Revolt (132-135 CE). 6 April 1949 5708 (1948), 5709 (1949) 25 pruta 19.5 mm 2.8 g Cupro-nickel Reeded Value and date in Hebrew within wreath. 4 January 1950 5709 (1949) 50 pruta 23.5 mm 5.69 g A Branch of Grape Leaves. Value and date within wreath made up of two stylized olive branches that for a circle around perimeter. 11 May 1949 100 pruta 2.4 mm 28.5 mm Date palm tree with seven branches and two bunches of dates. Country name is listed in Hebrew and Arabic . Value and date in Hebrew within wreath ofhttps://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestine_pound"In 1937, a local Arab leader, Auni Bey Abdul-Hadi, told the Peel Commission, which ultimately suggested the partition of Palestine: "There is no such country [as Palestine]! 'Palestine' is a term the Zionists invented! There is no Palestine in the Bible. Our country was for centuries part of Syria."Moshe Kohn, “The Arabs’ ‘Lie’ of the Land,” Jerusalem Post, (October 18, 1991).Myths & Facts - Israel’s Roots“The Jews have no claim to the land they call Israel.” “Palestine was always an Arab country.” “The Palestinians are descendants of the Canaanites and were in Palestine long before the Jews.” “The Balfour Declaration did not give Jews a right to a homeland in Palestine.” “The 'traditional position' of the Arabs in Palestine was jeopardized by Jewish settlement.” “Zionism is racism.” “The delegates of the U.N. World Conference Against Racism agreed that Zionism is racism.” “The Zionists could have chosen another country besides Palestine.” “Herzl himself proposed Uganda as the Jewish state as an alternative to Palestine.” “All Arabs opposed the Balfour Declaration, seeing it as a betrayal of their rights.” “The Zionists made no effort to compromise with the Arabs.” “The Zionists were colonialist tools of Western imperialism.” “The British promised the Arabs independence in Palestine in the Hussein-MacMahon Correspondence.” “The Arabs fought for freedom in World Wars I and II.” “Israeli policies cause anti-Semitism.” “Supporters of Israel only criticize Arabs and never Israelis.” MYTH “The Jews have no claim to the land they call Israel.” FACT A common misperception is that all the Jews were forced into the Diaspora by the Romans after the destruction of the Second Temple in Jerusalem in the year 70 C.E. and then, 1,800 years later, suddenly returned to Palestine demanding their country back. In reality, the Jewish people have maintained ties to their historic homeland for more than 3,700 years. The Jewish people base their claim to the Land of Israel on at least four premises: 1) the Jewish people settled and developed the land; 2) the international community granted political sovereignty in Palestine to the Jewish people; 3) the territory was captured in defensive wars and 4) God promised the land to the patriarch Abraham. Even after the destruction of the Second Temple in Jerusalem and the beginning of the exile, Jewish life in the Land of Israel continued and often flourished. Large communities were reestablished in Jerusalem and Tiberias by the ninth century. In the 11th century, Jewish communities grew in Rafah, Gaza, Ashkelon , Jaffa and Caesarea . The Crusaders massacred many Jews during the 12th century, but the community rebounded in the next two centuries as large numbers of rabbis and Jewish pilgrims immigrated to Jerusalem and the Galilee. Prominent rabbis established communities in Safed , Jerusalem and elsewhere during the next 300 years. By the early 19th century — years before the birth of the mhttps://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/myths-and-facts-israel-146-s-rootsInternational Recognition of ZionismAt the San Remo conference in 1920, the Supreme Allied Council of the victorious powers accorded Britain mandatory powers in Palestine. The terms of the Balfour Declaration were incorporated into its terms, the preamble noting the "historical connection of the Jewish people with then Palestine" and calling for a reconstitution of their "national home in that country."San RemoHow San Remo Birthed the Jewish National HomeThere is probably no more understated event in the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict than the San Remo conference of April 1920. Convened for a mere week as part of the post-World War I peace conferences, which created a new international order onhttps://www.meforum.org/60748/how-san-remo-birthed-the-jewish-national-home?utm_sourceThe San Remo Conference 100 Years OnThere is probably no more understated event in the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict than the San Remo Conference of April 1920. Convened for a mere week as part of the post-WWI peace conferences that created a new international order on the basis of indigenous self-rule and national self-determination, the San Remo conference appointed Britain as mandatory for Palestine with the specific task of “putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2, 1917, by the British Government , and adopted by the other Allied Powers, in favour of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.” This mandate was then ratified on July 24, 1922 by the Council of the League of Nations—the postwar world organization and the UN’s predecessor.https://besacenter.org/mideast-security-and-policy-studies/san-remo-conference/https://israelforever.org/m/U2FsdGVkX19mU4bCQpX66z5UzV-54wrYHWerGg1m-7bpr08tabkS3EabA_I-1GGbfOtFevtX8E0https://israelbehindthenews.com/1920-the-year-the-conflict-commenced/20003/?utm_sourceWinston Churchill’s Defense of the Balfour Declaration in 1921“It is manifestly right that the Jews ... should have a national centre and a National Home where some of them may be reunited.” - Lenny Ben-Davidhttps://jcpa.org/article/winston-churchills-defense-balfour-declaration-1921/In 1922, Britain removed Trans-Jordan from the promises of the mandate, contrary to the wishes of the Zionist organization, and in 1922 the League of Nations officially awarded the mandate to Britain.The American Administration had already supported the Balfour Declaration in August 1918, and in 1922 the U.S. Congress endorsed an essentially similar document in a joint resolution.The result was that not only had the Balfour Declaration received support from two of the victorious powers in the war, it was also given international sanction. In the relatively short span of a quarter century, Zionism had taken a giant step towards realizing the principal aim set forth in its 1897 platform. Preparations for a Jewish state could now proceed under British protection until such a time as a decisive Jewish majority was established.The land in question was designated for the Jewish homeland under the 1922 Mandate, confirmed by the 1946 UN Charter, and under the Anglo-American Convention and other international treaties.Of central importance was the Jewish contention that the Palestine Mandate constituted legal recognition of Jewish national rights in Palestine: "The Balfour Declaration became a binding and unchallengeable international obligation from the moment when it was embodied in the Palestine Mandate" (Feinberg 1974, 242). This "right" to establish a "national home" in Palestine was preserved by the UN Charter whose Article 80 stipulates that nothing be done to alter the rights "of any states or any peoples" in territories currently under mandate. Hence, the world community is obligated to honor the commitments of the Mandate.Debunking Arab liesMark Vandermaas · Updated June 27, 2017Who really owns the land occupied by Israel and by what claim?Great questions! I’ve trained over 450 pro-Israel people about what I call Israel’s modern ‘land title deed’ from the League of Nations, so this question goes to the heart of my work. I’ll be citing 3 easy to understand references that together will give you everything you need to fact-check me: the(more)https://www.israelheartlandreport.com/news/the-beginnings-of-the-state-of-israel-in-1920?mc_cid=849238cfe4&mc_eid=e5ad3f4a35https://www.mythsandfacts.org/replyonlineedition/chapter-9.htmlArticle 80 of the UN CharterThe writer is an alumnus of Harvard and UCLA. The Jewish Agency that was named in the League of Nations Mandate for Palestine had a good grasp of the history of that Mandate and its purpose.  It wrote it down for the UN Charter drafting Committee and submitted it in April 1945.  The UN Charter is dated June 24, 1945. The document it submitted was entitled MEMORANDUM SUBMITTED TO THE UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE ON INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION , SAN FRANCISCO , CALIFORNIA , BY THE JEWISH AGENCY FOR PALESTINE APRIL, 1945.  You can find it on-line at: http://www.bjpa.org/Publications/downloadFile.cfm?FileID=22125  It is part of the legislative history for Article 80 of the UN Charter.  Chaim Weizmann signed it. The Agency is named in the Mandate as the official advisor to those administering the Mandate.  The Agency describes the intent of this legal instrument as follows: "The underlying intent and purpose of this international covenant is clear and was authoritatively reaffirmed by the British Royal Commission on Palestine (1937). The declarations, as quoted by the Commission, of leading statesmen responsible for the undertaking leave no doubt that what was intended was to afford the Jewish people the right and opportunity by immigration and settlement to transform Palestine into a Jewish State. Mr. Lloyd George, Prime Minister at the time of the Declaration, was explicit to this effect and other members of the British Government at that time, including Lord Robert Cecil in 1917, Sir Herbert Samuel in 1919, and Mr. Winston Churchill in 1920, "spoke or wrote in terms that could mean only that they contemplated the eventual establishment of a Jewish State." General Smuts too, who had been a member of the Imperial War Cabinet when the Balfour Declaration  was published, speaking in November, 1919 foretold an increasing stream of Jewish immigration into Palestine and "in generations to come a great Jewish State rising there once more." "That this was also the understanding of the American Delegation at the Peace Conference appears from the Outline of Tentative Report and Recommendations prepared by the Intelligence Section of that Delegation, in accordance with instructions, for the President and Plenipotentiaries at the Peace Conference, dated January 21, 1919,which recommended: "1. That there be established a separate state of Palestine. "2. That this state be placed under Great Britain as a Mandatory of the League of Nations. "3. That the Jews be invited to return to Palestine and settle there, being assured by the Conference of all proper assistance in so doing that may be consistent with the protection of the personal (especially the religious) and property rights of the non-Jewish population, and being further assured that it will be the policy of the League of Nations to recognize Palestine as a Jewish State as soon as it is a Jewish State in fact." In line with this President Wilson on March 3, 1919 declared: "I am persuaded that the Allied Nationshttp://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/19896As per Article 80 of the UN Charter, no UN resolution can override Israel’s existing legal rights and title of sovereignty over any region of the Land of Israel based on earlier acts of International Law: The Jan Smuts Resolution of January 30, 1919, Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations, including the Treaty of Versailles of June 28, 1919, the San Remo Resolution of April 25, 1920, the Mandate for Palestine as confirmed on July 24, 1922 and the Franco-British Convention of December 23, 1920, all of which recognized the historical connection of the Jewish People with the Land of Israel.The Lodge-Fish Resolution of September 21, 1922, was a Joint Resolution passed by both houses of the U.S. Congress and signed by President Warren Harding, endorsing the Balfour Declaration with slight variations. This made the text of the Joint Resolution part of the law of the United States until this very day."Resolved by the Senate and House of representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, that the United states of America favors the establishment in Palestine of a national Home for the Jewish people..."confirming the irrevocable right of Jews to settle in the area of Palestine — anywhere between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea:Under American Law when a joint resolution is passed by both the Senate and the House of Representatives in an identical form and then signed by the President, it becomes the Law of the U.S.7. Both the Lodge-Fish Resolution and the Anglo American Convention underwent the above noted process (see point 6). Therefore reconstituting Palestine as a National Homeland for the Jewish People worldwide and recognizing their historical connection to the land became part of US LAW.Any attempt to negate the Jewish people's right to Palestine — Eretz-Israel — and to deny them access and control in the area designated for the Jewish people by the League of Nations is an actionable infringement of both international law and the Supremacy Clause (Article VI, paragraph 2 of the United States Constitution), which dictates that Treaties "shall be the supreme Law of the Land".Lodge–Fish Resolution - WikipediaLodge-Fish Resolution Long title Joint Resolution Favoring the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish People Enacted by the 67th United States Congress Effective September 21, 1922 Public law 67-73 Introduced in the Senate by Henry Cabot Lodge ( R - MA ) on June 30, 1922 Passed the House on (passed voice vote) Passed the Senate on Agreed to by the House on and by the Senate on (agreed) Signed into law by President Warren G. Harding on September 21, 1922 The Lodge–Fish Resolution [1] was a joint resolution of both houses of the US Congress that endorsed the Jewish-Mandate for Palestine protected by the British Mandate for Palestine . [3] [4] It was introduced in June 1922 by Hamilton Fish III , a Republican New York Representative , and Henry Cabot Lodge , a Republican Senator from Massachusetts . [5] It came about following a significant lobbying effort by the American Zionist community , particularly through the efforts of Zionist Rabbi Simon Glazer . [5] It was opposed by the State Department ; a prominent anti-Zionist rabbi at the congressional hearings; and the New York Times , which was owned by the anti-Zionist Adolph Ochs . [5] On September 21, 1922, US President Warren G. Harding signed the joint resolution of approval to establish a Jewish National Home in Palestine , per the 1917 Balfour Declaration . [6] [5] The full text is as follows: "Favoring the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled . That the United States of America favors the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which should prejudice the civil and religious rights of Christian and all other non-Jewish communities in Palestine, and that the holy places and religious buildings and sites in Palestine shall be adequately protected." [italics in the original] Bibliography [ edit ] References [ edit ] ^ Lodge-Fish Resolution, Pub.L. 67–73 , Sep 21, 1922, 42 Stat. 1012. ^ Lebow 1968 , p. 501. ^ 67th Congress, H.J.Res. 322; pdf ^ Brecher 1987 . ^ a b c d Medoff 2002 , p. 215-216. ^ Howard Grief, The Legal Foundation and Borders of Israel under International Law , (Mazo Publishers, Jerusalem, 2008), p. 198.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lodge-Fish_ResolutionGail Ellis · Updated March 29, 2018Is Palestine an integral part of Israel?A short history lesson and some maps would seem to be in order here. This is a map of the area made by a Dutch cartographer in the 16th century, when it was ruled by the Ottoman empire. As you can see, there is no Palestine on this map. (There is a Judea, and a Syria and a Gaza, but no Palestine.) Here(more)Six Facts You Must Know About The Balfour Declaration and the Right to a Jewish National HomelandBalfour in 6 easy steps.https://israelforever.org/interact/blog/six_facts_you_must_know_about_the_balfour_declaration_and_the_right_to_a_jewish_national_homeland/?utm_content=Link+538802&utm_campaign=Newsletter&utm_source=A+Longing+Across+Time+and+Space&utm_medium=EmailA Palestinian-Arab state on land lawfully designated for the Jewish state violates U.S. treaty obligations (the 1924 Anglo-American Convention/Treaty and UN Charter) guaranteeing the Jewish people’s rights to the entire mandatory area, including Judea/Samaria.It also contradicts the Oslo Accords, which, as confirmed by then-Prime Minister Yitzchak Rabin’s last speech to the Knesset, contemplated a Palestinian entity that is less than a state.Armistice Agreement of 1949http://www.knesset.gov.il/process/docs/armistice_jordan_eng.htmhttp://www.knesset.gov.il/process/docs/armistice_jordan_eng.htmArticle 69. The Armistice Demarcation Lines defined in articles V and VI of this Agreement are agreed upon by the Parties without prejudice to future territorial settlements or boundary lines or to claims of either Party relating thereto.Setting the Record Straight: Israel’s Legal Rights to Judea and SamariaJoin the world's largest pro-Israel community with over 9 million members! By sharing biblical, historical and modern perspectives, we promote worldwide unity with the People, Country and Land of Israel. Join here –> https://unitedwithisrael.orghttps://unitedwithisrael.org/setting-the-record-straight-israels-legal-rights-to-judea-and-samaria/http://www.mythsandfacts.org/Conflict/mandate_for_palestine/MandateN2%20-%2010-29-07-English.pdfMay 14, 1948 — Miracle or Catastrophe?A Jewish truck that was attacked by Arab irregulars on the main road to Jerusalem, 1948. Photo: Wikimedia Commons. On …https://www.algemeiner.com/2020/05/14/may-14-1948-miracle-or-catastrophe/Nonetheless, Jordan illegally seized Judea/Samaria and the eastern portion of Jerusalem in the 1948-1949 Arab war to destroy Israel.Jordan illegally occupied these areas for the next 19 years. During that time, Jordan killed and expelled the Jews who had lived in eastern Jerusalem for centuries; destroyed 58 synagogues; erased the Jewish Quarter in the Old City of Jerusalem, violated the armistice agreements by refusing to allow Jews any access to holy Jewish religious sites; and used thousands-of-years-old Jewish gravestones to line latrines. Jordan destroyed Jewish towns and villages, factories and the hydro electric power plant. Executed Jewish prisoners of war and expelled all Jews from the Territories. Ethnic cleansing.Jordan's Desecration of Jerualem (1948-1967)Soon after Israel declared its independence , the surrounding Arab states invaded. The Arab Legion of Jordan attacked Jerusalem . Their forces blocked Jerusalem’s roads and cut off the city’s access to water. After bitter fighting, the Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem’s Old City fell to the vastly superior arms and numbers of the Arab Legion on May 27, 1948. The surviving Jewish inhabitants fled to the “New City,” the four-fifths of the capital that Israel successfully held. Nearly twenty years later, during the 1967 Six-Day War , Israel’s army liberated the Old City, finding the Jewish Quarter completely neglected and much of it destroyed. The following is photographic evidence of the destruction. All but one of the 35 synagogues within the Old City were destroyed; those not completely devastated had been used as hen houses and stables filled with dung-heaps, garbage. and carcasses. The revered Jewish graveyard on the Mount of Olives was in complete disarray with thousands of tombstones broken, some of which were used as building materials for roads and latrines. Large areas of the cemetery were leveled to provide a short-cut to a new hotel. Hundreds of Torah scrolls and thousands of holy books were plundered and burned to ashes. Click Left/Right to Scroll Jordanian hotel built on The Mount of Olives . In the background is the road cut through the cemetery. ‹ › Gravestones were used by the Jordanians as cheap building material. ‹ › The Jordinians decied that gavestones would make good stairs. You can see Hebrew inscriptions on the stones. ‹ › Road made of Jewish tombstones. ‹ › Tombstones used as pavement in the Azaria Arab Legion camp on the Jerusaelm-Jericho road ‹ › Tombstone used as a bench at the Azaria Arab Legion camp on the Jerusaelm-Jericho road ‹ › Tombstones used for a wall terrace in Jerusalem ‹ › The Jordanians used Jewish tombstones from The Mount of Olives for extensive army purposes. This is the inside of an Arab Legion Barrack at the Azaria Camp. ‹ › This synagogue, once a beautiful structrure in the Old City, was reduced by the Jordanians to rubble. ‹ › This used to be a place were students would learn and people would sit and pray. These broken walls are all that remain. ‹ › The pile of stones used to be a gate to this synagogue. This gate has beautiful designs and was an attraction of this place of worship. ‹ › This synagogue has been ripped apart. The back wall used to be the ark with many Torah scrolls. More than 300 men used to pray here every Shabbat. ‹ › One of the first synagogues the Jordanians destroyed. It used to be an imposing structure on the skyline that could be seen from miles away. ‹ ›https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jordan-s-desecration-of-jerualem-1948-1967Jordanian snipers perched in eastern Jerusalem hills to shot at Jewish children in the western part of Jerusalem.Elke Weiss · Updated December 9, 2016What was life for a Jew living in West Bank under Jordanian occupation during 1948-1967?There were none. Jews were ethnically cleansed from the Old City of Jerusalem, Hebron and Eztion over the few decades. I can detail it in longer length, but I'll spare you my long winded response and give you a detail. In Mark A. Tessler. (1994). A History of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict. Indiana(more)Arab Threats Against IsraelIn the weeks leading up to the Six Day War, Arab leaders repeatedly threatened Israel with annihilation. Together with Egypt's ejection of United Nations forces, the closing of the Straits of Tiran, and the massing of troops on Israel's northern and southern borders, the fiery rhetoric created a state of existential fear in Israel. Egypt "Our aim is the full restoration of the rights of the Palestinian people. In other words, we aim at the destruction of the State of Israel. The immediate aim: perfection of Arab military might. The national aim: the eradication of Israel." – President Nasser of Egypt, November 18, 1965 "Brothers, it is our duty to prepare for the final battle in Palestine." – Nasser, Palestine Day, 1967 "Our basic objective will be the destruction of Israel. The Arab people want to fight . . . The mining of Sharm el Sheikh is a confrontation with Israel. Adopting this measure obligates us to be ready to embark on a general war with Israel." – Nasser, May 27, 1967 "We will not accept any ... coexistence with Israel. ... Today the issue is not the establishment of peace between the Arab states and Israel .... The war with Israel is in effect since 1948." – Nasser, May 28, 1967 "The armies of Egypt, Jordan, Syria and Lebanon are poised on the borders of Israel . . . . to face the challenge, while standing behind us are the armies of Iraq, Algeria, Kuwait, Sudan and the whole Arab nation. This act will astound the world. Today they will know that the Arabs are arranged for battle, the critical hour has arrived. We have reached the stage of serious action and not declarations." – Nasser, May, 30, 1967 after signing a defense pact with Jordan's King Hussein "We are now ready to confront Israel .... The issue now at hand is not the Gulf of Aqaba, the Straits of Tiran, or the withdrawal of UNEF, but the ... aggression which took place in Palestine ... with the collaboration of Britain and the United States." – Nasser, June 2, 1967 "Under terms of the military agreement signed with Jordan, Jordanian artillery co-ordinated with the forces of Egypt and Syria is in a position to cut Israel in two at Kalkilya, where Israeli territory between the Jordan armistice line and the Mediterranean Sea is only twelve kilometers wide ... ." – El Akhbar newspaper, Cairo, May 31, 1967 Cairo Radio Statements: May 19, 1967: "This is our chance Arabs, to deal Israel a mortal blow of annihilation, to blot out its entire presence in our holy land" May 22, 1967: "The Arab people is firmly resolved to wipe Israel off the map" May 25, 1967: "The Gulf of Aqaba, by the dictum of history and the protection of our soldiers, is Arab, Arab, Arab." May 25, 1967: "Millions of Arabs are ... preparing to blow up all of America's interests, all of America's installations, and your entire existence, America." May 27, 1967: "We challenge you, Eshkol, to try all your weapons. Put them to the test; they will spell Israel's death and annihilation." May 30, 1967: "With the closinhttp://www.sixdaywar.org/content/threats.asp"Israel warned King Husseinnot to enter the war. But his mind was already made up, and he had put Jordan's efficient army under the command of a less than capable Egyptian general."1967 war: Six days that changed the Middle EastThe human drama behind the 1967 Middle East Warhttps://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-39960461" As the King recounted in his book on the war:It was now 9 A.M. on Monday, June 5, and we were at war.Riad [the Egyptian general who commanded Jordanian forces] increased our fire power against the Israeli air bases by directing our heavy artillery – long-range 155's – on the Israeli air force installations within our line of fire. Our field artillery also went into action, and our Hawker Hunters [British-supplied fighter jets] were ready to take part in the combined operation with the Iraqi and Syrians. (Hussein of Jordan: My “War” with Israel, by King Hussein, p 63)With Jordanian artillery raining shells on Israeli targets from Jerusalem to Tel-Aviv and beyond, and Jordanian jets preparing to launch bombing runs, the King received through the U.N. a conciliatory message from Israel stating that if Jordan did not attack Israel, Israel would not attack Jordan. In the King’s own words:... we received a telephone call at Air Force Headquarters from U.N. General Odd Bull. It was a little after 11 A.M.The Norwegian General informed me that the Israeli Prime Minister had addressed an appeal to Jordan. Mr. Eshkol had summarily announced that the Israeli offensive had started that morning, Monday June 5, with operations directed against the United Arab Republic, and then he added: “If you don’t intervene, you will suffer no consequences.”By that time we were already fighting in Jerusalem and our planes had just taken off to bomb Israeli airbases. So I answered Odd Bull:“They started the battle. Well they are receiving our reply by air.”Three times our Hawker Hunters attacked the bases at Natanya in Israel without a loss. And our pilots reported that they destroyed four enemy planes on the ground, the only ones they had seen.On their side, the Iraqis bombed the airport at Lydda. And a little later, the Syrians finally headed for the base at Ramad David and the refineries in Haifa. (Hussein, p. 64-65)Despite the Jordanian attacks, the Israelis did not respond. As the Israeli Foreign Minister Abba Eban put it, the Israelis hoped that “King Hussein was making a formal gesture of solidarity with Egypt,” in other words, that the artillery barrage and bombing runs were for show, and that they did not presage a general offensive. But this was not to be – after the Israelis sent their peace message, the Jordanian attacks only grew in intensity."Jordanian FrontIn the days before June 5, Jordan had deployed in the West Bank opposite Israel ten of its eleven brigades, totaling some 45,000 men. In the north were three infantry brigades: one near the Jordan river, opposite the Israeli town of Beit Shean, one around the city of Jenin, and one near the city of Tulkarem (where Israel is only about 10 miles wide). In the central sector were four brigades: an infantry brigade near Qalqilya, right on the Israeli border, another near Latrun, also on the border, and two around Jerusalem. In the south was an infantry brigade around Hebron, and in the rear, near the Damia bridge over the Jordan river and near Jericho, were two armored brigades, the main striking forces of the Jordanian army. The eleventh Jordanian brigade was deployed south of the Dead Sea, facing Israel’s Negev Desert and pointing towards the Egyptian forces in the Sinai. According to the joint Jordanian-Egyptian plans this brigade’s role was to fight into the Negev and link up with the advancing Egyptians, thereby cutting Israel in half. An Iraqi brigade, based on the other side of the Damia Bridge, with three more on the way, and two Egyptian commando battalions deployed near Latrun rounded out the forces arrayed against Israel on the Jordanian front. The western half of the of the West Bank — that is, the portion bordering on Israel — is mountainous and densely populated, especially the Old City of Jerusalem, and the large cities of Jenin, Nablus, Ramallah and Hebron. The terrain is nothing like the open spaces of the Sinai, so suited to tank warfare. In the West Bank the geography favored the defenders, offering innumerable ambush points and potential bottlenecks, which the Jordanians had supplemented by building many strategically located fortified positions, with trenches, bunkers, ammunition storerooms and gun emplacements. However, because Egypt was the strongest and most threatening of the Arab countries, Israel had to deploy the bulk of its forces in the south. Consequently, against the eleven Jordanian brigades and the Iraqi expeditionary force, the Israelis could muster only three infantry brigades and an armored brigade. Just after hostilities began between Israel and Egypt, the Egyptian commander Marshal Amer sent a message to Jordan’s King Hussein, reporting that 75 percent of Israel’s planes had been shot down or disabled, and urging Hussein to open a second front. As the King recounted in his book on the war: It was now 9 A.M. on Monday, June 5, and we were at war. Riad [the Egyptian general who commanded Jordanian forces] increased our fire power against the Israeli air bases by directing our heavy artillery – long-range 155's – on the Israeli air force installations within our line of fire. Our field artillery also went into action, and our Hawker Hunters [British-supplied fighter jets] were ready to take part in the combined operation with the Iraqi and Syrians. ( Hussein of Jordan: My “War” with Israel , by King Hussein, p 63)http://www.sixdaywar.org/content/easternfront.aspIsrael liberated Judea/Samaria and the eastern portion of Jerusalem in a defensive war in 1967 from the illegal occupation of Jordan.Why history still matters: The 1967 Six Day WarPoliticians, diplomats, and journalists continue to grapple with the consequences of that war, but to make real sense of it, they need to pay attention to contexthttps://blogs.timesofisrael.com/why-history-still-matters-the-1967-six-day-war-3/Jordan is Palestine"Yasser Arafat, an Egyptian, (Rahman aka "Little Yasir" ibn Abdel Rauf al-Qudwa al-Husseini) has stated that Jordan is Palestine.Other Arab leaders, even King Hussein and Prince Hassan of Jordan, from time to time have affirmed that "Palestine is Jordan and Jordan is Palestine." Moreover, in 1970-1971, later called the "Black September" period, when King Hussein waged war against Yasser Arafat's Arab PLO forces, who had been operating freely in Jordan until then, it was considered not an invasion of foreign terrorists but a civil war. It was "a final crackdown" against those of "his people"26 whom he accused of trying to establish a separate Palestinian state, under Arab Palestinian rule instead of his own, "criminals and conspirators who use the commando movement to disguise their treasonable plots," to "destroy the unity of the Jordanian and Palestinian people."27Two states for two people, Jordan must contributeHistory of Jordan, Jordan as Palestine Two states for two people, Jordan must contribute In the most extensive remarks to date on his proposed Middle East agreement, U.S. President Bill Clinton made a plea Sunday  for peace, telling U.S. Jewish leaders their land also is the Palestinians' homeland and "there is no choice but for you to divide this land into two states for two people." --  Speech to the Israel Policy Forum, Jan 7, 2001 Yet Jordan is also Palestine.  Here are two Jordanian State Stamps one from 1964, bearing the likeness of King Hussein and pictures Mandated Palestine as an undivided territory [All of Israel of today plus Jordan of today]..., the other a 1949 stamp pictures King Abdullah of the kingdom of Jordan and bears the label of Palestine in English and Arabic. The land on which Israel was located contained only a fraction of the Palestine Mandate originally dedicated to the Jews as their homeland, incorporating the Balfour Declaration. 1 The League of Nations and the British had designated the land called "Palestine" for the "Jewish National Home" -- east and west of the Jordan River from the Mediterranean to Arabia and Iraq, and north and south from Egypt to Lebanon and Syria. 2 Historian Arnold Toynbee observed in 1918 that the "desolate" land "which lies east of the Jordan stream," 3 was capable of supporting a large population if irrigated and cultivated scientifically. ... The Zionists have as much right to this no-man's land as the Arabs, or more. Thus, the territory known variously as "Palestine," as "South Syria," as "Eastern and Western Palestine," or as part of "Turkey" had been designated by international mandate as a "Jewish National Home," concerning which the United States declared, That there be established a separate state of Palestine.... placed under Great Britain as a mandatory of the League of Nations ... that the Jews be invited to return to Palestine and settle there.... and being further assured that it will be the policy of the League of Nations to recognize Palestine as a Jewish state as soon as it is a Jewish state in fact. . . . England, as mandatory, can be relied on to give the Jews the privileged position they should have without sacrificing the [religious and property] rights of non-Jews. 4 The Arabs of that day achieved independent Arab statehood in various lands around Palestine but not within Palestine itself Sovereignty was granted after World War I to the Arabs in Syria and Iraq; in addition, Saudi Arabia consisted of approximately 865,000 square miles of territory that was designated as "purely Arab" 5 Considering all the "territories" that had been given to the Arabs, Lord Balfour "hoped" that the "small notch" of Palestine east and west of the Jordan River, which was "being given" to the Jewish people, would not be "grudged" to them by Arab leaders . 6 But, in a strategic move, the British Government apparently felt "the need to assuage the Emir's [Ahttp://www.eretzyisroel.org/~jkatz/jordan.htmlSyrian President Hafez Assad told Yasser Arafat, “Palestine is an integral part of Syria,” and Prince Hassan of the Jordanian National Assembly said, on February 2, 1970, “Palestine is Jordan and Jordan is Palestine.”PLO executive committee member, Zahir Muhsein, said, “The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel.” in short, its only purpose is to oppose Zionism and this is one of many war tactics.https://besacenter.org/perspectives-papers/palestinian-political-sclerosis/https://www.israelheartlandreport.com/news/israel-a-zionist-occupation-state?mc_cid=aedc4dc52c&mc_eid=e5ad3f4a35WATCH: 'Palestine Was Never a State, the Cause is an Illusion,' Says Arab Expert | United with Israel'Arabs have been destroying their nations for years for the sake of the Palestinian myth,' laments a Saudi writer.https://unitedwithisrael.org/watch-palestine-was-never-an-independent-state-the-cause-is-an-illusion-says-arab-expert/?utm_sourceYefim Shestik · Updated June 9, 2020Israel wants Palestine’s land, but not its people. Is it true?Arab Palestinian lands are in Arab State Jordan- Arab Palestinian state that Brits created from the land of Jewish National Homeland that had a total population of 200 000 people in 1921 and area 5 times bigger than Israel! About what Palestinian Land you talking about? The Israel land that Israel r(more)Solomon GreenI was very interested in your paper. Like you I have been worried by the growing number of paper appearing on this site and on a number of other publications that twist the facts.In 2015 I prepared a paper* for a fiend of mine who was the pro-Arab head of the Foreign Office, having previously been British Ambassador in Riyadh, and Damascus and Counsellor in Cairo. As a member pf the House of Lords, he often made pro -Palestinian speeches. He died after a two-year illness earlier this month.He was one of the most intelligent men that I have met. I am not sure that I ever convinced him that the "settlements"were not "illegal". The nearest that he would come is to say that they "are considered illegal" rather than "they are illegal".He did, however, repeat on more than one occasion and, at my request in front of a former British Defence minister, that "the Arabs are unique, they will tell you something which they firmly believe even when they know that it is not true."I have only managed to read a small part of your paper as it seems to be interspersed every other paragraph with advertisements for other articles on Quora but I am very much looking forward to reading the complete article if I can manage to download it.*since amended several times as I gained more evidence.https://www.mythsandfacts.org/replyonlineedition/chapter-9.htmlArticle 80 of the UN CharterThe writer is an alumnus of Harvard and UCLA. The Jewish Agency that was named in the League of Nations Mandate for Palestine had a good grasp of the history of that Mandate and its purpose.  It wrote it down for the UN Charter drafting Committee and submitted it in April 1945.  The UN Charter is dated June 24, 1945. The document it submitted was entitled MEMORANDUM SUBMITTED TO THE UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE ON INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION , SAN FRANCISCO , CALIFORNIA , BY THE JEWISH AGENCY FOR PALESTINE APRIL, 1945.  You can find it on-line at: http://www.bjpa.org/Publications/downloadFile.cfm?FileID=22125  It is part of the legislative history for Article 80 of the UN Charter.  Chaim Weizmann signed it. The Agency is named in the Mandate as the official advisor to those administering the Mandate.  The Agency describes the intent of this legal instrument as follows: "The underlying intent and purpose of this international covenant is clear and was authoritatively reaffirmed by the British Royal Commission on Palestine (1937). The declarations, as quoted by the Commission, of leading statesmen responsible for the undertaking leave no doubt that what was intended was to afford the Jewish people the right and opportunity by immigration and settlement to transform Palestine into a Jewish State. Mr. Lloyd George, Prime Minister at the time of the Declaration, was explicit to this effect and other members of the British Government at that time, including Lord Robert Cecil in 1917, Sir Herbert Samuel in 1919, and Mr. Winston Churchill in 1920, "spoke or wrote in terms that could mean only that they contemplated the eventual establishment of a Jewish State." General Smuts too, who had been a member of the Imperial War Cabinet when the Balfour Declaration  was published, speaking in November, 1919 foretold an increasing stream of Jewish immigration into Palestine and "in generations to come a great Jewish State rising there once more." "That this was also the understanding of the American Delegation at the Peace Conference appears from the Outline of Tentative Report and Recommendations prepared by the Intelligence Section of that Delegation, in accordance with instructions, for the President and Plenipotentiaries at the Peace Conference, dated January 21, 1919,which recommended: "1. That there be established a separate state of Palestine. "2. That this state be placed under Great Britain as a Mandatory of the League of Nations. "3. That the Jews be invited to return to Palestine and settle there, being assured by the Conference of all proper assistance in so doing that may be consistent with the protection of the personal (especially the religious) and property rights of the non-Jewish population, and being further assured that it will be the policy of the League of Nations to recognize Palestine as a Jewish State as soon as it is a Jewish State in fact." In line with this President Wilson on March 3, 1919 declared: "I am persuaded that the Allied Nationshttp://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/19896As per Article 80 of the UN Charter, no UN resolution can override Israel’s existing legal rights and title of sovereignty over any region of the Land of Israel based on the above earlier acts of International Law: The Jan Smuts Resolution of January 30, 1919, Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations, including the Treaty of Versailles of June 28, 1919, the San Remo Resolution of April 25, 1920, the Mandate for Palestine as confirmed on July 24, 1922 and the Franco-British Convention of December 23, 1920, all of which recognized the historical connection of the Jewish People with the Land of Israel.A Palestinian-Arab state on land lawfully designated for the Jewish state violates U.S. treaty obligations (the 1924 Anglo-American Convention/Treaty and UN Charter) guaranteeing the Jewish people’s rights to the entire mandatory area, including Judea/Samaria.It also contradicts the Oslo Accords, which, as confirmed by then-Prime Minister Yitzchak Rabin’s last speech to the Knesset, contemplated a Palestinian entity that is less than a state.Armistice Agreement of 1949http://www.knesset.gov.il/process/docs/armistice_jordan_eng.htmhttp://www.knesset.gov.il/process/docs/armistice_jordan_eng.htmArticle 69. The Armistice Demarcation Lines defined in articles V and VI of this Agreement are agreed upon by the Parties without prejudice to future territorial settlements or boundary lines or to claims of either Party relating thereto.http://www.mythsandfacts.org/Conflict/mandate_for_palestine/MandateN2%20-%2010-29-07-English.pdfNonetheless, Jordan illegally seized Judea/Samaria and the eastern portion of Jerusalem in the 1948-1949 Arab war to destroy Israel.Jordan illegally occupied these areas for the next 19 years. During that time, Jordan killed and expelled the Jews who had lived in eastern Jerusalem for centuries; destroyed 58 synagogues; erased the Jewish Quarter in the Old City of Jerusalem, violated the armistice agreements by refusing to allow Jews any access to holy Jewish religious sites; and used thousands-of-years-old Jewish gravestones to line latrines. Jordan destroyed Jewish towns and villages, factories and the hydro electric power plant. Executed Jewish prisoners of war and expelled all Jews from the Territories. Ethnic cleansing.Jordanian snipers perched in eastern Jerusalem hills to shot at Jewish children in the western part of Jerusalem.Israel recaptured Judea/Samaria and the eastern portion of Jerusalem in a defensive war in 1967.https://www.israelheartlandreport.com/news/israel-a-zionist-occupation-state?mc_cid=aedc4dc52c&mc_eid=e5ad3f4a35Further, in 2005, Israel withdrew from all of Gaza. 98% of the Palestinian Arabs now live in areas governed by the Palestinian Authority (PA); with their own Parliament, schools, textbooks, media, courts, and governing institutions.West Bank settlements not illegal, Pompeo announces in historic shiftU.S. Ambassador Friedman to ‘Post’: New policy advances the cause of Israeli-Palestinian peace • PM: Policy rights a historical wronghttps://m.jpost.com/Israel-News/West-Bank-settlements-not-illegal-US-decides-in-historic-US-policy-shift-608222https://www.israelhayom.com/opinions/the-problem-with-opposing-israels-occupation/https://www.israelhayom.com/opinions/the-problem-with-opposing-israels-occupation/The Many Incoherences and Hypocrisies of International Law on Jerusalem » MosaicThere's a quadruple standard at work: a double standard within a double standard.https://mosaicmagazine.com/response/israel-zionism/2019/07/the-many-incoherences-and-hypocrisies-of-international-law-on-jerusalem/https://www.israelhayom.com/opinions/end-which-occupation/https://www.israelhayom.com/opinions/end-which-occupation/Presidential Candidates and the Sacred Cow of ‘Occupation’US Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) at the second Democratic presidential debate in Detroit on July 30, 2019. Photo: Screnshot. Even …https://www.algemeiner.com/2019/08/21/presidential-candidates-and-the-sacred-cow-of-occupation/?utm_content=blog1&utm_medium=daily_email&utm_campaign=email&utm_source=internal/“The Occupation” – How the EU Discriminates Against IsraelWhy does the EU single out Israeli “occupation” over other “occupations”? Because anti-Israeli, pro-Palestinian positions are one of the few rallying cries that unite Europe.https://besacenter.org/perspectives-papers/eu-discrimination-israel/https://www.algemeiner.com/2019/09/13/more-human-rights-hypocrisy/?utm_content=opinion1&utm_medium=daily_email&utm_campaign=email&utm_source=internal/https://www.meforum.org/59531/is-gaza-occupied?utm_sourceMaximilliano Serna · Answered April 9, 2018Is Gaza occupied under international law?International Law is a rather nebulous and artificial construct. The powers of the world largely give the arbitrators of such “law” very selective lip service. In other words, the vast majority of nations near completely blow off such rulings unless they serve them on the field of propaganda. The US(more)Jordan is Palestinehttp://tundratabloids.com/jordan-is-palestine/A Realistic Two-State SolutionThe problem with the “two-state solution”—the creation of a sovereign independent Palestinian state west of the Jordan River—is that a Palestinian state already exists east of the Jordan River. It’s called Jordan. Its population is predominantly Palestinian, and it is located in the eastern part of what was once called Palestine. Demographically and geographically, Jordan is a Palestinian state.https://besacenter.org/perspectives-papers/a-realistic-two-state-solution/Palestine pound - WikipediaPalestine pound Coinage Issued by the Palestine currency Board Image Value Technical parameters Description Date of first issue Dated years of issue Diameter Mass Composition Edge Obverse Reverse 1 mil 21 mm 3.23 g Bronze Plain "Palestine" in Arabic , English , and Hebrew , year of minting. In Hebrew; also mentions in the acronym (א״י) for Eretz Yisrael (Land of Israel). Value in Arabic , English , and Hebrew , olive sprig 1927 1927, 1935, 1937, 1939, 1940, 1941, 1942, 1943, 1944, 1946 2 mils 28 mm 7.77 g 1927, 1941, 1942, 1945, 1946 5 mils 20 mm 2.91 g Cupro-nickel Value in Arabic , English , and Hebrew 1927, 1934, 1935, 1939, 1941, 1946 5 mills 20 mm 2.9 Bronze 1942 1942, 1944 10 mils 27 mm 6.47 g Cupro-nickel 1927 1927, 1933, 1934, 1935, 1937, 1939, 1940, 1941, 1942, 1946 10 mils 27 mm 6.47 Bronze 1942 1942, 1943 20 mils 30.5 mm 11.33 g Cupro-nickel 1927 1927, 1933, 1934, 1935, 1940, 1941 20 mils 30.5 mm 11.3 Bronze 1942 1942, 1944 50 mils 23.5 mm 5.83 g 720‰ Silver Reeded "Palestine" in Arabic , English , and Hebrew , year of minting, olive sprig. In Hebrew; also mentions in the acronym (א״י) for Eretz Yisrael (Land of Israel). 1927 1927, 1931, 1933, 1934, 1935, 1939, 1940, 1942, 1943 100 mils 29 mm 11.66 g Issued by the State of Israel Image Value Technical parameters Description Date of first issue Dated years of issue Diameter Mass Composition Edge Obverse Reverse 1 pruta [12] 21 mm 1.3 g Aluminum Plain Anchor; " Israel " in Hebrew and Arabic . The design is based on a coin of Alexander Jannaeus (76-103 BCE). The denomination "1 Pruta" and the date in Hebrew ; two stylized olive branches around the rim. 25 October 1950 5709 (1949) 5 pruta 20 mm 3.2 g Bronze Four-stringed lyre; "Israel" in Hebrew and Arabic . The design is based on a coin from the Bar-Kochba Revolt (132-135CE). The denomination "5 Pruta" and the date in Hebrew ; two stylized olive branches around the rim. 28 December 1950 10 pruta 27 mm 6.1g Two-handled amphora ; "Israel" in Hebrew and Arabic. The design is based on a coin from the Bar-Kochba Revolt (132-135CE). The denomination "10 Pruta" and the date in Hebrew ; two stylized olive branches around the rim. 4 January 1950 25 mil 30 mm 3.8 g Aluminum Cluster of grapes, based on coins struck during the Bar-Kochba Revolt (132-135 CE); "Israel" in Hebrew above and in Arabic below. The denomination "25 Mil" in Hebrew and Arabic ; date in Hebrew below; two stylized olive branches around, based on coins struck during the Bar-Kochba Revolt (132-135 CE). 6 April 1949 5708 (1948), 5709 (1949) 25 pruta 19.5 mm 2.8 g Cupro-nickel Reeded Value and date in Hebrew within wreath. 4 January 1950 5709 (1949) 50 pruta 23.5 mm 5.69 g A Branch of Grape Leaves. Value and date within wreath made up of two stylized olive branches that for a circle around perimeter. 11 May 1949 100 pruta 2.4 mm 28.5 mm Date palm tree with seven branches and two bunches of dates. Country name is listed in Hebrew and Arabic . Value and date in Hebrew within wreath ofhttps://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestine_poundSettlementshttps://www.melaniephillips.com/elizabeth-warren-destruction-wests-moral-compass5607-2/https://israelforever.org/interact/blog/legal_rights_jewish_people_land_of_israel/?utm_content=Link+479538&utm_campaign=Newsletter&utm_source=History+Matters+in+our+fight+for+Truth&utm_medium=EmailLabelling the Jewish state as unequalAs Israel came under attack this week with hundreds of rockets raining down from Gaza, and as it steeled itself for even worse, the Israel-bashers were up to thhttps://www.melaniephillips.com/labelling-jewish-state-unequal/https://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-news-and-politics/294359/israels-rights-in-the-west-bank-under-international-lawhttps://honestreporting.com/jewish-claim-west-bank/https://unitedwithisrael.org/opinion-new-us-policy-on-settlements-is-a-diplomatic-turning-point/?utm_sourceFrom ZOA"In fact, U.S. treaty obligations and binding international law, including the Anglo-American Convention of 1924 and the Jewish people’s clause of the UN Charter, confirm the Jewish people’s rights to settle these lands.Jimmy Carter’s and Barrack Hussein Obama’s policies thus violated international law, and it was absolutely correct to end the Carter/Obama positions.Judea/Samaria is the holy Jewish land where our people lived and prayed for thousands of years. It is the land where Abraham purchased the cave and fields in Hebron to bury his beloved wife Sarah; and where the Maccabees fought off foreign invaders and Hellenists. It is where the shepherd David tended his flock, was anointed king, and first established his kingdom. It is where the ancient Jewish community of Hebron lived for centuries, until Arabs massacred the Jewish community in 1929. It is where the Jewish people planted the fields and cultivated our spiritual heritage."https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/11/why-the-u-s-is-right-to-recognize-west-bank-settlements-as-legal/https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wsj.com/amp/articles/pompeo-busts-the-occupation-myth-11574207220https://www.camera.org/article/political-advocacy-journalism-distorts-coverage-of-us-policy-on-settlements/http://jcpa.org/article/the-legality-of-israels-settlements/https://www.melaniephillips.com/negiotiation-war-extermination-solution-surrender/https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/in-fact-the-israeli-settlements-were-never-illegal/https://www.meforum.org/59947/the-myth-of-occupied-palestineAnswer to What was the endeavor to reclaim territory from Israel called? by Meir Sprecher Meir Sprecher's answer to What was the endeavor to reclaim territory from Israel called?https://mfa.gov.il/MFA/MFA-Archive/2003/Pages/DISPUTED%20TERRITORIES-%20Forgotten%20Facts%20About%20the%20We.aspxCamp David’s less well known agreement of Sept.1978, "A Framework for Peace in the MiddleEast", contained guidelines to establish Palestinian autonomy and a set of principles that would govern Israel’s relations with all its Arab neighbors. Exactly what this meant in political or territorial terms was left intentionally vague, its precision limited to forcing the parties to decide on a process guaranteeing full autonomy for Palestinians within a period of five years.Michael Jacobs · Answered January 27, 2017What is the ultimate goal of Israel by building settlements in the West Bank?What is the ultimate goal of Israel by building settlements in the West Bank? Since Israel has already built a large number of settlements in the West Bank and continues to do so, then it seems that the Two-State solution is off the table for Israel. In that case, what is the ultimate goal Israel has(more)https://m.jpost.com/Opinion/Why-President-Trump-is-keeping-the-promise-made-at-San-Remo-in-1920-612785https://besacenter.org/perspectives-papers/occupation-jewish-left/Let’s Talk About ColonialismFrom the blog of Dani Ishai Behan at The Times of Israelhttps://blogs.timesofisrael.com/lets-talk-about-colonialism/Two scribes behind 31 inscriptions discovered in biblical Samaria“If only two scribes wrote the examined Samaria texts contemporaneously and both were located in Samaria rather than in the countryside, this would indicate a palace bureaucracy at the peak of the Kingdom of Israel’s prosperity,”https://www.quora.com/q/israel-currents/Two-scribes-behind-31-inscriptions-discovered-in-biblical-Samaria?ch=10&share=8a7ea438&srid=B25Fwhttps://mailchi.mp/thelawfareproject/wh-peace-plan?e=dadfecae8cYefim Shestik · Answered February 10, 2020What is the ideal solution for the Palestine and Israeli conflict in your mind?Neo- Palestinians have their independable Arab State in East Palestine in Area Trans -Jordan From 1946. So why they want another Arab independable state? Alternative is make another Peace initiative to help the Arab Jordanians ressettle to East Palestine- Jordan. Build there the working places and ec(more)How a Former Non-Zionist Became a Supporter of IsraelThe Israeli flag at the Western Wall in Jerusalem. Photo: Hynek Moravec via Wikimedia Commons. As a progressive, I’ve been …https://www.algemeiner.com/2020/02/14/how-a-former-non-zionist-became-a-supporter-of-israel/The History of the Land Is Jewish, Not PalestinianThe claim by the elected representatives of the Israeli Arab public that they are the original owners of the land while the Jewish citizens of Israel (and, by implication, the State of Israel itself) are “colonialist invaders” is a complete inversion of historical reality. US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s declaration about the legality of the West Bank’s Jewish communities, along with President Trump’s peace plan based on that principle, offers a unique opportunity to correct that mistaken notion by applying sovereignty to all Israeli West Bank communities.https://besacenter.org/perspectives-papers/israel-jewish-palestinian/https://www.fdd.org/analysis/2020/01/27/occupied-elsewhere/https://israelbehindthenews.com/the-1967-borders-the-kinks/19716/?utm_source=mailpoet&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ibn-todayTim Benton · Updated April 19, 2020Why do some say that Israel stole land from Palestinians?Lose? To imply loss, or theft, in any court of law you first have to establish ownership. Here is the problem with this claim - There has never in the history of this world been a sovereign nation known as Palestine, so how exactly did they lose what they never possessed? We see this map presented by a(more)https://unitedwithisrael.org/watch-former-palestinian-terrorist-debunks-lies-about-occupation/?utm_sourcehttps://www.israelhayom.com/2020/03/19/gaza-like-you-never-knew-it/Why Do Liberals Dismiss President Trump's Peace Plan Out of Hand?While it is morally right to help any community or individual unjustly persecuted or forced to live in squalor, the historical record shows that Israel did not launch the wars against it, nor inspire terrorism, nor perpetuate the multi-generationalhttps://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/15644/liberals-trump-peace-planThe Legal Foundation and Borders of Israel Under International Law by Howard Grief.https://israelforever.org/interact/blog/legal_rights_jewish_people_land_of_israel/?utm_content=Link+479538&utm_campaign=Newsletter&utm_source=History+Matters+in+our+fight+for+Truth&utm_medium=Emailhttps://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-news-and-politics/294359/israels-rights-in-the-west-bank-under-international-lawAnswer to What was the endeavor to reclaim territory from Israel called? by Meir Sprecher Meir Sprecher's answer to What was the endeavor to reclaim territory from Israel called?M. D Roberts·November 15, 2010Superb. Lays bare so much propaganda & revisionist history.This excellent detailed study by Professor Howard Grief addressing both Israel's legal foundation and borders is an absolute must read. The culmination of 25 years of study addresses a plethora of issues including the San Remo peace conference & a detailed appraisal of the Palestine Mandate, including its original intent, interpretation and application.The study pulls no punches in showing that the Balfour Declaration, Mandate and League of Nations were intent upon the rebirth of not just a Jewish national home but a Jewish state based upon a historical formula founded upon the 1st/2nd Temple period territories, including lands up to the Litani Valley in present day Lebanon. The present borders of Israel are shown to be clearly not those originally designated for the Jewish people by the aforementioned international agreements.Detailed reference reveals how it was originally agreed between Britain & France that the borders of a Jewish Palestine would be based on the historical or Biblical formula, "from Dan to Beersheba", a phrase appearing several times in the Bible.This shown to have been interpreted up until 1920 by Prime Minister Lloyd George & other British officials to mean that Palestine would include all the lands or regions historically associated with the Jewish People. That is all territory which at one time or other was conquered, settled & governed by the Israelites in the 1st /2nd Temple periods.The historical formula for determining these boundaries was accepted at the San Remo Peace Conference & referred to to in the Mandate Charter, which referred to the historical connection of the Jewish People with Palestine. The British themselves relying on George Adam Smith's "Atlas of the Historical Geography of the Holy Land", published in 1915, in particular on Plate No. 34 that depicted the territory under David and Solomon.The book makes sobering reading as the British are shown to have not abided by their obligations under the Mandate, instead giving precedence to their own political self interests, regional expedience & their relationship with the Arab/Islamic world. The influence of French interests in the region also playing a considerable part as Western entities reneged upon their responsibilities & obligations pertaining to a Jewish home/state in what was Palestine.The reader is shown how international agreements then made & still make it quite clear today, that Israel had/has a perfect legal right to settle land in the disputed territories in 1967, since this was the right assigned to the Jewish people under International Law. Law which continues to be in force despite the political nuances of today which are expedient to the larger pro-Arab international community.Self serving political machinations & expedience are again shown when, under Article 5 of the Mandate Britain - which was not allowed to partition the land - Britain then did so by severing 77% to create the Arab state of Transjordan which, from the moment of its creation, was closed to all Jewish migration and settlement - a clear betrayal of the British promise the tones of which resound even now.Under Article 6 of the Mandate Britain,was supposed to encourage Jewish immigration % settlement all over the now disputed territory - a Jewish right which exists to this day under International Law, despite the Mandate treaty's enactment in 1948.Yet Britain is shown to have reneged upon this responsibility too. British foreign policy of the time, extending to the present day, shown to be that of appeasing the Arab/Islamic world as it appears to continually sacrifice Israel upon the altar of political expedience.In November 1938 the British 'Cabinet Committee For Palestine' held a meeting which effectively resulted in the reneging upon of the Balfour Declaration & the League of Nations Mandate. Foreign Secretary, Lord Halifax, told the Committee that "the Government would have to choose between it's commitments to the world of Jewry & it's commitments to the world of Islam..." It was subsequently decided that Britain could not afford to antagonise the Muslim world. This resulted in the British White Paper of 1939 which served to appease the Arab/Islamic world & severely restricted Jewish immigration to Palestine. This was the British policy as the Holocaust descended upon the Jews of Europe.It is virtually impossible to do justice to the vast amount of evidence available in this 700+ page study. I can but highly recommend this work to anyone interesting in the Jewish state, the Arab-Israeli conflict & the manner in which the latter is portrayed/perceived in our day.With such a vast array of facts at your fingertips the individual is left to ponder a number of issues. Not least being how the international community has seemingly side-stepped history & embraced the creation of a Palestinian state in territories promised to the Jewish people & to which they have a heritage spanning many thousands of years. The prerequisite of such a state's creation being the removal/ethnic cleansing of the entire Jewish presence from these areas.With due reference to the contents of this study, the conviction that Jewish settlements in the West Bank are illegal is now so commonly accepted, it hardly seems as though the matter is even open for discussion. Such a case is blown completely out of the water by reference to the factual history. Though routinely referred to nowadays as "Palestinian" land, at no point in history has Jerusalem or the West Bank (Judea and Samaria) been under Palestinian sovereignty in any sense of the term.This compelling account (the book) shows the reader how the public is clearly being completely and utterly deceived by the manner in which the Palestinian-Israeli conflict is being presented to them (in the media), in the face of skillfully orchestrated revisionist history (meaning the “new historians") and a tidal wave of anti-Israel propaganda.This is a book that desperately needs to be read & re-read. International leaders, including those within Israel itself, need to avail themselves of the information provided here.Red Horizons by Ion Michai PacepaA former chief of Romania's foreign intelligence service reveals the extraordinary corruption of the Nicolae Ceausescu government of Romania, its brutal machinery of oppression, and its Machiavellian relationship with the West. An in side story of how Communist Party leaders really live.Maximilliano Serna · Answered April 9, 2018Is Gaza occupied under international law?International Law is a rather nebulous and artificial construct. The powers of the world largely give the arbitrators of such “law” very selective lip service. In other words, the vast majority of nations near completely blow off such rulings unless they serve them on the field of propaganda. The US(more)David Matas, Lecturer in Constitutional Law at McGill University, stated."For there to be an occupation at international law, there has to be an occupying and occupied power both of which are members of the community of nations. The only conceivable occupied power for the West Bank was Jordan. Yet Jordan has renounced all claims over the West Bank." 'Further, in 2005, Israel withdrew from all of Gaza. 98% of the Palestinian Arabs now live in areas governed by the Palestinian Authority (PA); with their own Parliament, schools, textbooks, media, courts, and governing institutions.West Bank settlements not illegal, Pompeo announces in historic shiftU.S. Ambassador Friedman to ‘Post’: New policy advances the cause of Israeli-Palestinian peace • PM: Policy rights a historical wronghttps://m.jpost.com/Israel-News/West-Bank-settlements-not-illegal-US-decides-in-historic-US-policy-shift-608222https://www.israelhayom.com/opinions/the-problem-with-opposing-israels-occupation/https://www.israelhayom.com/opinions/the-problem-with-opposing-israels-occupation/The Many Incoherences and Hypocrisies of International Law on Jerusalem » MosaicThere's a quadruple standard at work: a double standard within a double standard.https://mosaicmagazine.com/response/israel-zionism/2019/07/the-many-incoherences-and-hypocrisies-of-international-law-on-jerusalem/https://www.israelhayom.com/opinions/end-which-occupation/https://www.israelhayom.com/opinions/end-which-occupation/Presidential Candidates and the Sacred Cow of ‘Occupation’US Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) at the second Democratic presidential debate in Detroit on July 30, 2019. Photo: Screnshot. Even …https://www.algemeiner.com/2019/08/21/presidential-candidates-and-the-sacred-cow-of-occupation/?utm_content=blog1&utm_medium=daily_email&utm_campaign=email&utm_source=internal/“The Occupation” – How the EU Discriminates Against IsraelWhy does the EU single out Israeli “occupation” over other “occupations”? Because anti-Israeli, pro-Palestinian positions are one of the few rallying cries that unite Europe.https://besacenter.org/perspectives-papers/eu-discrimination-israel/https://www.algemeiner.com/2019/09/13/more-human-rights-hypocrisy/?utm_content=opinion1&utm_medium=daily_email&utm_campaign=email&utm_source=internal/https://www.meforum.org/59531/is-gaza-occupied?utm_source=Middle+East+Forum&utm_campaign=fabac90761-MEF_Mainen_2019_10_08_11_36&utm_mediumJordan is Palestinehttp://tundratabloids.com/jordan-is-palestine/A Realistic Two-State SolutionThe problem with the “two-state solution”—the creation of a sovereign independent Palestinian state west of the Jordan River—is that a Palestinian state already exists east of the Jordan River. It’s called Jordan. Its population is predominantly Palestinian, and it is located in the eastern part of what was once called Palestine. Demographically and geographically, Jordan is a Palestinian state.https://besacenter.org/perspectives-papers/a-realistic-two-state-solution/Palestine pound - WikipediaPalestine pound Coinage Issued by the Palestine currency Board Image Value Technical parameters Description Date of first issue Dated years of issue Diameter Mass Composition Edge Obverse Reverse 1 mil 21 mm 3.23 g Bronze Plain "Palestine" in Arabic , English , and Hebrew , year of minting. In Hebrew; also mentions in the acronym (א״י) for Eretz Yisrael (Land of Israel). Value in Arabic , English , and Hebrew , olive sprig 1927 1927, 1935, 1937, 1939, 1940, 1941, 1942, 1943, 1944, 1946 2 mils 28 mm 7.77 g 1927, 1941, 1942, 1945, 1946 5 mils 20 mm 2.91 g Cupro-nickel Value in Arabic , English , and Hebrew 1927, 1934, 1935, 1939, 1941, 1946 5 mills 20 mm 2.9 Bronze 1942 1942, 1944 10 mils 27 mm 6.47 g Cupro-nickel 1927 1927, 1933, 1934, 1935, 1937, 1939, 1940, 1941, 1942, 1946 10 mils 27 mm 6.47 Bronze 1942 1942, 1943 20 mils 30.5 mm 11.33 g Cupro-nickel 1927 1927, 1933, 1934, 1935, 1940, 1941 20 mils 30.5 mm 11.3 Bronze 1942 1942, 1944 50 mils 23.5 mm 5.83 g 720‰ Silver Reeded "Palestine" in Arabic , English , and Hebrew , year of minting, olive sprig. In Hebrew; also mentions in the acronym (א״י) for Eretz Yisrael (Land of Israel). 1927 1927, 1931, 1933, 1934, 1935, 1939, 1940, 1942, 1943 100 mils 29 mm 11.66 g Issued by the State of Israel Image Value Technical parameters Description Date of first issue Dated years of issue Diameter Mass Composition Edge Obverse Reverse 1 pruta [12] 21 mm 1.3 g Aluminum Plain Anchor; " Israel " in Hebrew and Arabic . The design is based on a coin of Alexander Jannaeus (76-103 BCE). The denomination "1 Pruta" and the date in Hebrew ; two stylized olive branches around the rim. 25 October 1950 5709 (1949) 5 pruta 20 mm 3.2 g Bronze Four-stringed lyre; "Israel" in Hebrew and Arabic . The design is based on a coin from the Bar-Kochba Revolt (132-135CE). The denomination "5 Pruta" and the date in Hebrew ; two stylized olive branches around the rim. 28 December 1950 10 pruta 27 mm 6.1g Two-handled amphora ; "Israel" in Hebrew and Arabic. The design is based on a coin from the Bar-Kochba Revolt (132-135CE). The denomination "10 Pruta" and the date in Hebrew ; two stylized olive branches around the rim. 4 January 1950 25 mil 30 mm 3.8 g Aluminum Cluster of grapes, based on coins struck during the Bar-Kochba Revolt (132-135 CE); "Israel" in Hebrew above and in Arabic below. The denomination "25 Mil" in Hebrew and Arabic ; date in Hebrew below; two stylized olive branches around, based on coins struck during the Bar-Kochba Revolt (132-135 CE). 6 April 1949 5708 (1948), 5709 (1949) 25 pruta 19.5 mm 2.8 g Cupro-nickel Reeded Value and date in Hebrew within wreath. 4 January 1950 5709 (1949) 50 pruta 23.5 mm 5.69 g A Branch of Grape Leaves. Value and date within wreath made up of two stylized olive branches that for a circle around perimeter. 11 May 1949 100 pruta 2.4 mm 28.5 mm Date palm tree with seven branches and two bunches of dates. Country name is listed in Hebrew and Arabic . Value and date in Hebrew within wreath ofhttps://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestine_poundSettlementshttps://www.melaniephillips.com/elizabeth-warren-destruction-wests-moral-compass5607-2/https://israelforever.org/interact/blog/legal_rights_jewish_people_land_of_israel/?utm_content=Link+479538&utm_campaign=Newsletter&utm_sourceIsrael: The Settlements Are Not IllegalIndigenous peoples have the right to the lands, territories and resources which they have traditionally owned, occupied or otherwise used or acquired (Art. 26.1) and that the exercise of these rights shall be free from discrimination of any kind (Art. 2)https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/16032/israel-settlements-not-illegalLabelling the Jewish state as unequalAs Israel came under attack this week with hundreds of rockets raining down from Gaza, and as it steeled itself for even worse, the Israel-bashers were up to thhttps://www.melaniephillips.com/labelling-jewish-state-unequal/https://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-news-and-politics/294359/israels-rights-in-the-west-bank-under-international-lawhttps://honestreporting.com/jewish-claim-west-bank/https://unitedwithisrael.org/opinion-new-us-policy-on-settlements-is-a-diplomatic-turning-point/?utm_sourceFrom ZOA"In fact, U.S. treaty obligations and binding international law, including the Anglo-American Convention of 1924 and the Jewish people’s clause of the UN Charter, confirm the Jewish people’s rights to settle these lands.Jimmy Carter’s and Barrack Hussein Obama’s policies thus violated international law, and it was absolutely correct to end the Carter/Obama positions.Judea/Samaria is the holy Jewish land where our people lived and prayed for thousands of years. It is the land where Abraham purchased the cave and fields in Hebron to bury his beloved wife Sarah; and where the Maccabees fought off foreign invaders and Hellenists. It is where the shepherd David tended his flock, was anointed king, and first established his kingdom. It is where the ancient Jewish community of Hebron lived for centuries, until Arabs massacred the Jewish community in 1929. It is where the Jewish people planted the fields and cultivated our spiritual heritage."https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/11/why-the-u-s-is-right-to-recognize-west-bank-settlements-as-legal/https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wsj.com/amp/articles/pompeo-busts-the-occupation-myth-11574207220https://www.camera.org/article/political-advocacy-journalism-distorts-coverage-of-us-policy-on-settlements/http://jcpa.org/article/the-legality-of-israels-settlements/https://www.melaniephillips.com/negiotiation-war-extermination-solution-surrender/https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/in-fact-the-israeli-settlements-were-never-illegal/https://www.meforum.org/59947/the-myth-of-occupied-palestineAnswer to What was the endeavor to reclaim territory from Israel called? by Meir Sprecher Meir Sprecher's answer to What was the endeavor to reclaim territory from Israel called?https://mfa.gov.il/MFA/MFA-Archive/2003/Pages/DISPUTED%20TERRITORIES-%20Forgotten%20Facts%20About%20the%20We.aspxCamp David’s less well known agreement of Sept.1978, "A Framework for Peace in the MiddleEast", contained guidelines to establish Palestinian autonomy and a set of principles that would govern Israel’s relations with all its Arab neighbors. Exactly what this meant in political or territorial terms was left intentionally vague, its precision limited to forcing the parties to decide on a process guaranteeing full autonomy for Palestinians within a period of five years.Michael Jacobs · Answered January 27, 2017What is the ultimate goal of Israel by building settlements in the West Bank?What is the ultimate goal of Israel by building settlements in the West Bank? Since Israel has already built a large number of settlements in the West Bank and continues to do so, then it seems that the Two-State solution is off the table for Israel. In that case, what is the ultimate goal Israel has(more)https://m.jpost.com/Opinion/Why-President-Trump-is-keeping-the-promise-made-at-San-Remo-in-1920-612785https://besacenter.org/perspectives-papers/occupation-jewish-left/Let’s Talk About ColonialismFrom the blog of Dani Ishai Behan at The Times of Israelhttps://blogs.timesofisrael.com/lets-talk-about-colonialism/Two scribes behind 31 inscriptions discovered in biblical Samaria“If only two scribes wrote the examined Samaria texts contemporaneously and both were located in Samaria rather than in the countryside, this would indicate a palace bureaucracy at the peak of the Kingdom of Israel’s prosperity,”https://www.quora.com/q/israel-currents/Two-scribes-behind-31-inscriptions-discovered-in-biblical-Samaria?ch=10&share=8a7ea438&srid=B25Fwhttps://mailchi.mp/thelawfareproject/wh-peace-plan?e=dadfecae8cYefim Shestik · Answered February 10, 2020What is the ideal solution for the Palestine and Israeli conflict in your mind?Neo- Palestinians have their independable Arab State in East Palestine in Area Trans -Jordan From 1946. So why they want another Arab independable state? Alternative is make another Peace initiative to help the Arab Jordanians ressettle to East Palestine- Jordan. Build there the working places and ec(more)How a Former Non-Zionist Became a Supporter of IsraelThe Israeli flag at the Western Wall in Jerusalem. Photo: Hynek Moravec via Wikimedia Commons. As a progressive, I’ve been …https://www.algemeiner.com/2020/02/14/how-a-former-non-zionist-became-a-supporter-of-israel/The History of the Land Is Jewish, Not PalestinianThe claim by the elected representatives of the Israeli Arab public that they are the original owners of the land while the Jewish citizens of Israel (and, by implication, the State of Israel itself) are “colonialist invaders” is a complete inversion of historical reality. US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s declaration about the legality of the West Bank’s Jewish communities, along with President Trump’s peace plan based on that principle, offers a unique opportunity to correct that mistaken notion by applying sovereignty to all Israeli West Bank communities.https://besacenter.org/perspectives-papers/israel-jewish-palestinian/https://www.fdd.org/analysis/2020/01/27/occupied-elsewhere/https://israelbehindthenews.com/the-1967-borders-the-kinks/19716/?utm_sourceTim Benton · Updated April 19, 2020Why do some say that Israel stole land from Palestinians?Lose? To imply loss, or theft, in any court of law you first have to establish ownership. Here is the problem with this claim - There has never in the history of this world been a sovereign nation known as Palestine, so how exactly did they lose what they never possessed? We see this map presented by a(more)https://unitedwithisrael.org/watch-former-palestinian-terrorist-debunks-lies-about-occupation/?utm_sourceTim Benton · Answered May 23, 2018Who has done more wrong? Who deserves the land more, Israel or Palestine?The misconception of wrong or right having anything to do with the division of the land is actually more a liberal thought that is being put forth lately. Who has a legal right to the land more depends on legal issues, historical records. The question then is how does Israel have a claim that is fulf(more)https://www.israelhayom.com/2020/03/19/gaza-like-you-never-knew-it/Why Do Liberals Dismiss President Trump's Peace Plan Out of Hand?While it is morally right to help any community or individual unjustly persecuted or forced to live in squalor, the historical record shows that Israel did not launch the wars against it, nor inspire terrorism, nor perpetuate the multi-generationalhttps://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/15644/liberals-trump-peace-planIsrael: Not a European colonyFrom the blog of Sherry Sufi at The Times of Israelhttps://blogs.timesofisrael.com/israel-not-a-european-colony/Right of return. Myth.https://quillette.com/2020/04/28/the-war-of-return-a-review/Regarding the use of the term Annexation:https://www.jns.org/for-israel-to-give-up-its-heartland-is-like-the-us-giving-up-the-statue-of-liberty/Please note that Israel has no need to annex Judea and Samaria liberated in a defensive war in 1967 from Jordanian occupation.These Territories were designated by the League of Nations and ratified by 51 States as the historical ancestral indigenous Homeland of the Jewish people.Gail Ellis · Updated October 4, 2017Where is Palestine located in Israel and why is the territory fought over?To answer this question, we need to go back to WWI and look at a lot of maps. Here is a map of Ottoman empire drawn by a Dutch cartographer in 1607. As you can see, there is no Palestine on it. The whole area was part of the vilayet of Syria ruled by the Ottomans Now, here is a closeup of the Syrian v(more)The illegal occupation of the “West Bank" by Jordan ceased to exist in 1967.https://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/may/19/israels-daunting-decision-on-drawing-permanent-bor/Israel, the EU, and International Law | National ReviewIf the EU tries to present its cynical political calculations regarding annexations as upholding international law, there are a few things EU members need to learn.https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/05/european-union-israel-eu-presents-cynical-political-calculations-as-rule-of-law/"Annexation” is a misnomer for Israel’s lawful exercise of her sovereignty rights that were guaranteed to the Jewish people to re-establish the Jewish homeland 100 years ago, at the San Remo Conference and under the Mandate for Palestine.I'm disgusted with the blatant hypocrisy and double standards of the international community constantly directed against Israel.The status of the territories in question is a subject of major debate in international law, and Israel’s claims are no less legitimate than anyone else’s.https://www.algemeiner.com/2020/06/10/settlements-and-sovereignty/Annexation vs. Sovereignty: Words MatterView of Ma’aleh Adumim in Judea and Samaria on Jan. 1, 2017. Photo: Yaniv Nadav/Flash90. JNS.org – Words matter. They drive …https://www.algemeiner.com/2020/06/09/annexation-vs-sovereignty-words-matter/Language As an Anti-Israel ToolIsrael has largely ignored the war of words against it. This includes malicious terms such as “apartheid” and ”occupation,” as well as anti-Israel phrases like “land for peace” and “two-state solution.” The UN’s falsely calling descendants of Palestinians who fled during the 1948 war “refugees” is another example. Well before any new negotiations take place with the Palestinians, the issue of Palestinian incitement as part of their cult of the glorification of genocide and death should be put on the international agenda.https://besacenter.org/perspectives-papers/anti-israel-language/Myths about Sovereignty AssertionCritics say attaining sovereignty will undermine the peace process and ruin Israel's reputation abroad, but these myths do not hold up to scrutiny.https://davidmweinberg.com/2020/07/03/myths-about-sovereignty-assertion/The Economic Potential of Sovereignty Application - JISSWhen Israel declares sovereignty in the Jordan Valley and the Jerusalem Envelope, this must be accompanied by significant economic development and construction.https://jiss.org.il/en/gvirtzman-the-economic-potential-of-sovereignty-application/Opinion | The Middle East’s Dual ‘Occupations’The Israel-Morocco peace deal underscores a double standard on the West Bank versus Western Sahara.https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-middle-easts-dual-occupations-11608247133Israel, the EU, and International Law | National ReviewIf the EU tries to present its cynical political calculations regarding annexations as upholding international law, there are a few things EU members need to learn.https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/05/european-union-israel-eu-presents-cynical-political-calculations-as-rule-of-law/Washington Post Amnesia on Israel and ‘Annexation’The former Washington Post building. Photo: Wikimedia Commons. JNS.org – “History,” the late historian Bernard Lewis wrote, “is the collective …https://www.algemeiner.com/2020/06/21/washington-post-amnesia-on-israel-and-annexation/An annexation that isn't - British Jewry loses the plotannexation? Some British Jews demand everyone do what they want them to do. If not, they won't love Israel anymore. Oh please. I wish they'd just grow uphttp://david-collier.com/annexation-british-jewry/WATCH: 'We support Israeli annexation,' says Saudi journalist'We support Israeli annexation' says Saudi journalist Abdulhameed Al-Ghobain, 'because the Palestinians have lost many opportunities and have no more cards to play.'https://worldisraelnews.com/watch-we-support-israeli-annexation-says-saudi-journalist/?utm_sourceArab leaders threaten Israel relentlessly over annexation, but average Arabs who are sick and tired of their corrupt leaders and are singing a different tune.Applying Israel LawsThe right to sovereignty - OpedsIt is time for the people of Israel to apply sovereignty over the land to which they have historic ties to and is their true, promised, homeland. Many in the world are quick to provide reasons why it is appropriate to reject and even postpone the application of Israeli sovereignty to the territories of the ancestral land. Among them are those "exilic Jews,” who have seemingly lost their deep affinity for Israeli heritage and long-held belief in Zionism, and are paralyzed by the fear of what the Gentiles might think. Some of them will disguise this sentiment with statements expressing their concern that it would hurt the relationship with both Israel’s immediate and distant environments, albeit the latter has never truly demonstrated either deep understanding of, or affection for, the Jews. Some will insist that first, "staff work must be completed and explored," as if it has not yet been done, as if there is no justification and such a move would require proof. The Arabs at home and abroad would prefer that the State of Israel cease to exist as a Jewish state in the Land of Israel, regardless of their sovereignty over one piece of land or another. The hypocritical Europeans are terrified of the Arabs, only now beginning to realize that they themselves are losing sovereignty over their own countries in the face of an increase in “muscle-flexing” and civil insubordination on the part of the immigrants, most of them Arabs and Muslims, who do not really like Jews and even less - Christian infidels, whether they are anti-Semitic, neo-Nazi or just liberal democrats. In this article, I would like to make clear that the government is now urgently required to apply sovereignty, something that should have been accomplished 53 years ago, after the liberation of Judea, Samaria & the Jordan Valley from the Arab-Jordanian occupation. I would like to prove to those generals, politicians and experts, who have endless excuses for rejecting a good idea and a brave opportunity, insisting that instead they need to deepen their groundwork, establish a professional and independent committee, assure that they will prioritize and deal with the issue in person when the time is right, that continuing to postpone is a means of displaying weakness and demonstrates an inability to take courageous, demanding and determined action. With three examples, I will demonstrate the need to establish sovereignty now, stemming from the natural right of the Jewish people to territories in Judea, Samaria and the Jordan Valley: Gush Etzion - Israeli settlement bloc Whereas Gush Etzion was under the control of the people of Israel until their expulsion from their homeland some 2000 years ago at the time of the destruction of the Temple, and there is a great deal of archaeological evidence that there has been a significant Jewish presence there for quite some time, as well as documentation in the holy scripture, various books and writings; Whereas the land of Gush Etzion was legally purchashttp://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/283502HR International LawsOn the matter of Jewish sovereignty, everybody should settle downTwo nuclear powers, China and India face off and the world yawns. Israel states it will apply sovereignty over areas of Jueda and everyone loses the plot.http://david-collier.com/sovereignty/ICCs lack of jurisdiction over so called situation in Palestine 17 June 2020JavaScript must be enabled in order to view this page.https://mfa.gov.il/MFA/PressRoom/2020/Pages/ICCs-lack-of-jurisdiction-over-so-called-situation-in-Palestine-17-June-2020.aspxMaps of IsraelLevy Report - WikipediaPalestinian National Authority Edit Nabil Abu Rudaineh, a spokesperson for Palestinian National Authority President Mahmoud Abbas , dismissed the report and called on Israel to stop settlement activities if it is interested in reaching peace. [15] Palestinian officials also noted that the Levy Report was published on the anniversary of the 2004 International Court of Justice ′s advisory opinion which determined that Israel’s construction of its separation barrier across the Green Line in the West Bank violates international law. [3] Al Fatah , the PLO ′s largest faction headed by Mahmoud Abbas, reportedly issued a statement calling the Levy committee’s conclusions a "farce" that "mocked and defied the international community". [3] In a press release of 18 October 2012, Saeb Erekat , chief Palestinian negotiator, stated that "the Levy Report simply reflects the position of a government that has chosen to turn occupation into annexation and to impose an Apartheid reality in Palestine rather than taking steps to make peace possible". [16] Political reactions in Israel Edit Prime Minister Netanyahu praised the report, saying: "In my opinion, this report is important because it deals with the legalization and the legitimization of the settlement enterprise in Judea and Samaria on the basis of facts, a variety of facts and arguments that should be seriously considered", adding that the Ministerial Committee on Settlements would debate and decide the matter. [12] By the time the Knesset dissolved in October 2012 following the call for early elections in January 2013 , Netanyahu had not brought the report before the cabinet or the Ministerial Settlements Committee, which would have the power to approve it. Attorney-General Yehuda Weinstein reportedly had issued a general directive asking ministries not to make major policy decisions until the next government is sworn in, without specifically mentioning the Levy Report. [17] Foreign Minister Avigdor Liberman said he welcomes the report, and hopes the cabinet approves it, adding that "it's not perfect, but it's an important step". [4] Environmental Protection Minister Gilad Erdan said he "will work to ensure the government adopts the report’s conclusion and give a clear future and stability for tens of thousands of families after dozens of years," adding "finally, legal and historic justice has been done, following the twister political stances based on the Meretz activist Talia Sasson's report". [4] Interior Minister Eli Yishai praised the report, saying “the time has come to fix the injustice of the Talia Sasson Report and say openly that settlements in Judea and Samaria do not contradict the law, and complement the spirit of Zionism and Judaism". [4] Science and Technology Minister Daniel Herschkowitz called on Netanyahu to immediately convene the Ministerial Committee on Settlements to adopt the report, which "proves the Sasson report was political from the start to the end". [4] Public Diplomacy Minishttps://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levy_ReportThe Law of Annexation: What's Right and What's Wrong?On June 10 a web site called opiniojuris.org circulated an article entitled An Open Letter to the Israeli Government,  which claims that Israel's plans tohttps://honestreporting.com/the-legality-of-annexation-whats-right-and-whats-wrong/The Law of Annexation: What’s Right and What’s Wrong?Houses are seen in the Israeli settlement of Itamar, near Nablus, in the West Bank, June 15, 2020. Photo: Reuters …https://www.algemeiner.com/2020/06/22/the-law-of-annexation-whats-right-and-whats-wrong/The great myth of Israeli annexationThe Jewish state is not about to march across any border or claim even an inch of new territory. To the contrary, its footprint in Judea and Samaria will remain exactly the same.https://www.jns.org/opinion/the-great-myth-of-israeli-annexation/Opinion | Don’t Buy the ‘Annexation’ HypeApplying Israeli civilian law to West Bank settlements wouldn’t preclude peace or violate Palestinian rights.https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wsj.com/amp/articles/dont-buy-the-annexation-hype-11592932454ZOA Strongly Supports Israel Applying Sovereignty to Judea and Samaria and the Jordan Valley ImmediatelyIt’s the Law International law provides for Israeli sovereignty over Judea and Samaria and the Jordan Valley. These laws include the San Remo resolution, Lehttps://zoa.org/2020/06/10440664-zoa-strongly-supports-israel-applying-sovereignty-to-judea-and-samaria-and-the-jordan-valley-immediately/Palestine, UTI POSSIDETIS JURIS, and the borders of IsraelAbraham Bell* & Eugene Kontorovichhttps://arizonalawreview.org/pdf/58-3/58arizlrev633.pdfLance Forman on Territories100 legal scholars say Israel's sovereignty plan perfectly squares with international law'It is illegitimate and intellectually dishonest to predetermine the lawfulness of a policy by simply ignoring one side’s claims,' the legal scholars said in a letter.https://worldisraelnews.com/100-legal-eagles-say-israels-sovereignty-plan-perfectly-squares-with-international-law/When someone shows the picture of how Israel-Palestine territory has changed over time, how legit and realistic is it?My way of resisting antisemitism - debunking the libels and pointing out the double standards.https://www.quora.com/q/resistingantisemitism/When-someone-shows-the-picture-of-how-Israel-Palestine-territory-has-changed-over-time-how-legit-and-realistic-is-it?ch=10&share=f0550091&srid=B25FwNo occupation nor AnnexationLawfare Project educates foreign ministers on "annexation"In these letters, we urged the foreign ministers to retract their declarations and, instead, stand with Israel in its efforts to build a reunified state. You may have seen that we also recently warned U.S. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi that punitive measures against Israel in the event of reunification could violate our nation's laws. As the legal arm of the Jewish and pro-Israel community, we are fighting a fundamental injustice: the false narrative that skews history and the law to deny the Jewish people their sovereign rights over all of Israel. None of this would be possible without supporters like you. Thank you for helping The Lawfare Project combat misinformation and false narratives, and advance Jewish rights. We appreciate your commitment to this vital cause. Sincerely, Brooke Goldstein Executive Director, The Lawfare Projecthttps://mailchi.mp/thelawfareproject/lp-foreign-ministers?e=dadfecae8c"The State of Israel was not established as a colonizing entity in place of an Arab state. Rather, it was established as a fruit of decolonization of the former Turkish Ottoman Empire together with other independence movements in the region in the 20th century. Israel always intended to exist together in peace with an Arab state in the area of Mandatory Palestine. This constitutes a founding principle of Israel's Declaration of Independence."How to Dismantle the Distorted Western Discourse on IsraelRadical extremists cloak their anti-Israel and anti-Semitic messages with revolutionary jargon - How to Dismantle the Distorted Western Discourse on Israel - Alan Bakerhttps://jcpa.org/article/how-to-dismantle-the-distorted-western-discourse-on-israel/Irish Times Falls for Palestinian Maps Lie | Honest Reporting  The history of the Holy Land, its people and borders over the last century is among the most complicated in the world, but there are always somehttps://honestreporting.com/irish-times-falls-for-palestinian-maps-lie/Israel’s 2 top int’l law officials take on ICC: Is Gaza ‘occupied’?Confronting delegitimization of IDF conduct in Gaza, the blockade and closureshttps://m.jpost.com/arab-israeli-conflict/israels-2-top-intl-law-officials-take-on-icc-is-gaza-occupied-653894Kumar Mayank Jha · Updated September 21, 2019Is Israel really on the right side in this war? All we hear is that Hamas is a terrorist organization while Israel is protecting its citizens.( This answer has been re-written with 2 videos and a few images added. Few of my friends said that they did not have the patience to read through entire paragraphs and hence, I have added 2 videos which explain whatever I say in gist. You can view the videos or read the text. I have also capitalize(more)US to extend bilateral agreements with Israel into Judea and Samaria, GolanThe upcoming signing will expand scientific and academic cooperation between Israel and the United States into the disputed territories.https://www.jns.org/us-israel-to-sign-agreement-with-no-territorial-restrictions-for-future-deals/?utm_sourceWhen the UK returns Gibraltar to the Spanish, the Falklands to Argentina, NZ to the Maoris and Australia to the Aboriginals, then you can ask us again about international laws.Same goes for Russia and Cremes, China and Tibet, Morocco and Western Sahara, Turkey and Cyprus, Spain and Ceuta, France and the Pacific Islands, US and Hawaii and the list is endless.Ancient Witnesses: How Archaeology Confirms Israel’s God-Given Right to the Holy Land (Part 1) - The Friends of Israel Gospel MinistryShare on FacebookShare on Twitterhttps://www.foi.org/2021/01/22/ancient-witnesses-how-archaeology-confirms-israels-god-given-right-to-the-holy-land-part-1/?spMailingID=6548892&spUserID=MzEwNjU5NDEyNTc1S0&spJobID=1181262669&spReportId=MTE4MTI2MjY2OQS21948 Arab–Israeli War Jewish villages depopulatedJewish neighborhoods in East Jerusalem were depopulated by Jordanian forces following the Jordanian annexation of the West Bank. Some were repopulated after the Six-Day War.[citation needed] In areas that became Israel Beit Eshel (Beit Eshel - Wikipedia)Beit Yosef(Beit Yosef, Israel - Wikipedia)Hartuv Hartuv - Wikipedia)Kfar Uria Kfar Uria - WikipediaMishmar Ha-Yarden https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mishmar_HaYarden_(moshava)NirimNitzanim Nitzanim - WikipediaKibbutz Gesher (Gesher, Israel - Wikipedia) In areas that became the West Bank Jordanian annexation of the West Bank - Wikipedia Jordanian annexation of the West Bank - WikipediaAtarot Atarot - WikipediaBeit HaArava Beit HaArava - WikipediaJewish Quarter (Jerusalem) Jewish Quarter (Jerusalem) - WikipediaKalia Kalya - WikipediaNeve Yaakov Neve Yaakov - WikipediaGush Etzion[38] near Jerusalem Kfar Etzion massacre - WikipediaEin Tzurim Ein Tzurim - WikipediaKfar EtzionThe kibbutzim held off the attacks for ten days until Kfar Etzion fell. In the Kfar Etzion massacre on 14 May, 157 Jewish inhabitants of the village were murdered, as all but four of the inhabitants were executed by Arab Legion and irregular forces. The other three kibbutzim surrendered. The inhabitants there were taken as prisoners of war and released nine months later.[8]Kfar Etzion massacre Kfar Etzion massacre - WikipediaMasuot Yitzhak Masu'ot Yitzhak - WikipediaNeve Daniel Neve Daniel - WikipediaRevadim Revadim - WikipediaIn areas that became Gaza Strip (All-Palestine protectorate) Kfar Darom (resettled but evacuated as part of the Israeli disengagement from Gaza in 2005)Kfar DaromPlace in Israel Kfar Darom ( Hebrew : כְּפַר דָּרוֹם ‎, lit. South Village), was a kibbutz and an Israeli settlement within the Gush Katif bloc in the Gaza Strip . History Kfar Darom was founded on 250 dunams of land (about 25 hectares or 60 acres) purchased in 1930 by Tuvia Miller for a fruit orchard on the site of an ancient Jewish settlement of the same name mentioned in the Talmud . Following the 1936–1939 Arab revolt in Palestine , Miller sold his land to the Jewish National Fund in 1946. A community was established on the land at the close of Yom Kippur on 5 and 6 October 1946, by Hapoel HaMizrachi 's kibbutz movement as part of the 11 points in the Negev settlement plan. The community was named after a Talmudic-period village of the same name that was located near the site. In the summer of 1948, after numerous battles , the community was abandoned following a three-month siege by the Egyptian army during the 1948 Arab–Israeli War . [1] Kfar Darom, first house 1946 Following Israel's victory in the Six-Day War in 1967, and its subsequent occupation of the Gaza Strip , a Nahal military outpost was established at the site in 1970. [2] In 1989, this was converted to a civilian community by the Israeli national unity government of Shimon Peres ( Alignment ) and Yitzhak Shamir ( Likud ). The village also had an elementary school, a kollel for religious (adults married men) students and the "Torah and Land" Institute, for research into religious laws relating to agriculture in Israel. The visitor center contained the Garden of Commandments Museum, which illustrated commandments relating to the Land of Israel . Disengagement Residents protest against the evacuation of Kfar Darom. The sign reads: "Kfar Darom will not fall twice!" 18 August 2005 Forced evacuation of Kfar Darom, 18 August 2005 At the point of the disengagement plan in 2005, there were about sixty families, totaling about 330 people, who earned their living from the free working professions, agriculture, and a central packing center for the vegetables produced by the Gaza settler communities. Referenceshttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kfar_Darom