Article 49 of the Geneva Conventions is explicit and, as has been noted repeatedly by the United Nations (which oversees the World Court that enforces international law) Israel is in violation of Article 49. Rationalizations do not change this fact nor does it change the fact that Israel is in blatant violation of it's treaty agreements as a member of both the United Nations and the Geneva Conventions. As I have accurately stated Zionist Israel is an aparthied type nation similiar to the former S African and Nazi regimes. There is no fundamental difference between these types of regimes which violate the inalienable Rights of the Person based upon religious/ethnic/racial criteria. For me, as well as millions of Jews, this is the great sadness related to Zionist Israel. The "oppressed" became the "oppressor" instead of learning from the oppression they suffered.
Watch Professor Eugene Kontorovich VIDEO from the beginning to the end and you will get your answer... But you of course will not! For you publicly declare that you do not want to be bothered with facts by an 'authority' and that you are quite 'CONFORTABLE' with what you THINK is the fact! LOL I hope others will watch the VIDEO and tell you about it a little.
Americans who listen to what degenerates tell them to think about the world and ignore any experience that contradicts the egalitarian dogmas are very vulnerable to contributing to their country being taken over by its enemies. This touchy-feely warm and fuzzy view of the Arabs is not only childish, it is also dangerous to the freedom of the rest of us. We are free now only because previous American generations never accepted these modern views. There's nothing wrong with turning back the clock if it is connected to a time bomb.
You are free now because the muslims are now minority in the US . We in Europe are occupied by arabs. People that left UK, Austria, France etc..10 years ago and come back for a visit are shocked.
It seems unlikely to you, It seems realistic to me. 1. Jordan was more stable than other Arab states, Now it's less stable. 2. Violence will soon spills over from Syria. 3. Jordan does not have to absorb the entire Palestinian population... Same as Israel.. Many Jews live outside the country. 4. "Co-opting its Islamist groups" - that's an interesting word to 1970's black September slaughter !! 5. Arab League laws against it ? So what ! They have laws against Assad and he laughs at them. 6. Palestinians secular nationalism will have a big big room in the house called Jordan if the monarchy falls. Thank you.
Once again, this is a nifty fiction and all, but it still wouldn't change any of the legal and human rights issues surrounding the current conflict.
While the video is over 45 minutes long let's correct Professor Eugene Kontorovich. The professor is correct that treaties, such as the Geneva Conventions, do establish international law and Article 49 expressly prohibits any nation from allowing it's civilian population to immigrate into a territory of military occupations. Professor Eugene Kontorovich is also correct that traditions establish the "common law" of nations but is wrong related to the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice. The "common law" of nations is also created by decisions of the International Court of Justice just as the US Supreme Court establishes the common law of the United States. The International Court of Justice was created by the United Nations and has the delegated jurisdiction in international affairs based upon the UN Charter which is a treaty. Professor Eugene Kontorovich is partially correct that the UN General Assembly doesn't create international law by resolution based upon the UN Charter, which is a treaty agreement between nations, but can create International Law by altering the UN Charter (with the consent of the Security Council). The UN Security Council does in ALL, not some, cases create International law and precedent because UN Security Nation resolutions are binding on all members of the United Nations based upon the UN Charter. For example, in UNSC Resolution 242 when it refers to the "inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war" that established legal precedent under international law everywhere in the world. That didn't just refer to Israel but to any nation that attempts to acquire territory by an act of war. Additionally, also contained in UNSC 242 it stated, "Termination of all claims or states of belligerency and respect for and acknowledgment of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force." that didn't just mean Israel, Egypt, Jordan, Syria, and Iraq but all nations in the world had to comply with this requirement. Iran and even Japan (if applicable) could not initiate a belligerant claim against Israel or the Palestinians (and Israel cannot create belligerant claims against the Palestinians). It established precedent in International Law. Finally, also in UNSC 242 when it required the "Withdrawal of Israel armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict" it established that the territory was an "occupied" territory by the Israeli military. Professor Eugene Kontorovich is also correct on the League of Nations (British) Mandate for Palestine in 1922 but Transjordan had already been removed from "Palestine" as it's own political entity in 1921, a year previously, making the claim that Jordan is a part of Palestine, which is the title of this thread false. Transjordan was NOT a part of Palestine. Professor Eugene Kontorovich is both right and wrong related to the Mandate in that it does state that there was an intent to make Palestine a home for the Jews but he is lying when he states that the Mandate did not recognized that it was also the homeland of non-Jewish People already living there. The "Mandate" specifically states that the civil and religious Rights of the non-Jewish population could NOT be violated and the non-Jewish population already had a prior claim to Palestine. We must also note that a "Homeland" does not imply a "Nation" so there was no mandate for a Jewish Nation in Palestine. The Jews were invited to share Palestine with the existing Palestinians and a nation which respected the religious and civil Rights of both the Jewish and non-Jewish population was to be established as a homeland for both. We can also note that allowing the immigration of European Jews to Palestine itself was a violation of the civil Rights of the non-Jewish population of Palestine in and of itself. Next, as Professor Eugene Kontorovich noted, UN General Assembly Resolutions are non-binding and UNGA 181 had absolutely NO AUTHORITY whatsoever and yet the Israeli Declaration of Independence improperly refers to it as if it did. It did not. UNGA 181 was a proposal by the General Assembly which basically proposed that (and I paraphrase), "Since the Jews and Arabs can't get along how about both sides agreeing to split Palestine into two political entities, one for the Jewish population and one for the non-Jewish population." The Arabs rejected UNGA 181 so the proposal became moot as the UNGA has no actual authority. The Israeli Revolution violated international law based upon the existing Mandate for Palestine. While Great Britian was withdrawing as the "Mandatory" overseeing the adminstration of Palestine that merely left the United Nations in charge as the "Mandatory" to oversee Palestine. Next, the "after the fact" propaganda that the 6-Day war was authorized by Article 51 of the UN Charter is false. Article 51 is the "Self-Defense" clause in the UN Charter which states: Only if a nation is attacked can it resort to military force and then only to defend itself from that attack. Article 51 does not authorize the use of "pre-emptive" military force nor does it authorize the invasion of another country. While there had been minor military actions between Israeli and Syria where Israel was provoking attacks by intrusions into a security territory between Israel and Syria there had been no military attacks between Egypt and Israel. Israel was not defending itself against an Egyptian attack or invasion. The 6-Day war was a violation of International Law by Israel as Article 51 is a conditions of a Treaty (the UN Charter) and as Professor Eugene Kontorovich correctly stated Treaties establish International Law. The 6-Day war was a violation of International Law by Israel based upon the criteria presented by Professor Eugene Kontorovich. Based upon the very criteria noted by Professor Eugene Kontorovich Israel is an illegal nation that invaded Egypt, Jordan and Syria and illegally allowed it's civilian population to immigrate to a territory of military occupation as all of this is established by Treaty which is International Law. While Professor Eugene Kontorovich maybe a good "defense attorney" with an agenda to defend his client (Israel) he misrepresents the facts to argue his case. Any competent "prosecutor" would tear his arguments apart as even I can do that. And remember one important fact, Professor Eugene Kontorovich does not establish International Law and doesn't even have the authority to do so which the International Court of Justice does have and the International Court of Justice has ruled that the Israeli occupation is illegal establishing the "common law" between nations under the authority of the United Nations. His arguments are dishonest in many respects as I've noted and therefore can be dismissed even though, like Israeli propaganda as he does refer to some facts accurately, the foundation for his arguments are based upon both truth and lies and the lies discredit his conclusions. Bottom line, Palestine does not include Jordan (the thread title is wrong), Israel was an illegally formed nation in 1948 violating the Mandate for Palestine, Israel violated International Law (Article 51 of the UN Charter) in it's invasion during the 6-Day war, it has illegally allowed the immigration of Israel civilians into a territory of military occupation in violation of International Law (Geneva Conventions Article 49), and to comply with International Law it must withdraw from the territories occupied in 1967 (UN Security Council Resolution 242) which includes the West Bank and E Jerusalem.
Since I haven't documented this before, and to dispute Professor Eugene Kontorovich statement that the ICJ doesn't have jurisdiction in establishing International Law, let me provide the link to Articles 92 through 96 of the UN Charter which delegates this authority to the International Court of Justice. http://www.un.org/en/documents/charter/chapter14.shtml In declaring that Israel was illegally occupying the West Bank and E Jerusalem the ICJ was rendering a decision based upon the UN Charter. Israel does have the Right to Appeal this decision to the UN Security Council which can override the decision by the ICJ or it can refuse the override such a decision. The UNSC has NOT issued a Resolution overriding the decision of the ICJ which declared the Israeli accupation illegal so that decision stands. Reference Article 94 Clause 2. Isreal, under the UN Charter, could also submit this matter to an independent tribunal where both the Palestinians and the Israelis would be willing to submit to the jurisdiction of such a tribunal under Article 95. As noted in Article 93 Israel, by treaty agreement as a member of the United Nations, has voluntarily submitted itself to the authority and jurisdiction to the decisions of the International Court of Justice. Israel continues to violate International Law based upon the treaties to which it is a party. This is so well documented that no one can honestly dispute it although the "Zionist Jews" live in denial of the actual facts.
I disagree with your evaluation. THE STATUS OF JUDEA & SAMARIA ~by Hbendor Under the norm of International Law, the status of Judea & Samaria could only be considered "occupied" by Israel, if, in fact they had previously belonged to another sovereign state Jordan, as everyone knows, never existed prior to 1946, it gained control over the West Bank of the river Jordan and East Jerusalem in 1948, by an act of naked aggression against the newly RECONSTITUTED State of Israel. No country in the world apart from Great Britain (which created Jordan by fiat in the first place), and Pakistan recognized this annexation. This invasion did not give it legal title under International Law. In 1967, following Jordan's second all out renewed and failed try for a new invasion of Israel and its consequent loss of Control over Judea, Samaria and East Jerusalem in that attempt... The juridical situation returned to what it had been previously since the League of Nations Mandate Israel is therefore not occupying these areas, as they never belonged to Jordan or any other Arab country historically IN THE FIRST PLACE. The question is If Judea, Samaria are not "occupied territory, what then are they? One of the foremost International Legal Scholars, former Under-Secretary of State Eugene Rostow, describes these lands as the " unallocated parts of the British Mandate still governed by the original provisions contained in THE ORIGINAL MANDATE FOR PALESTINE that was sanctioned by the League of Nations in 1922. One of these provisions, Article 6, of the Mandate for Palestine allowed " close settlement...." of all western Palestine by the Jewish People, as Eastern Palestine was by then wrested away ignominiously from the Mandate by the then British Colonial Secretary Mr. Winston Churchill for the creation of the ARTIFICIAL Palestinian/Arab Emirate named Trans-Jordan now called Jordan. The Jewish settlements in these areas are the physical link of the People of Israel, with the Land of Israel from " Time Immemorial," a link that stretches back to the Bible, the Balfour Declaration, and its International recognition in the PREAMBLE of the Mandate for Palestine, that was confirmed by the League of Nations in 1922. Quote:- Whereas recognition has thereby been given to the historical connection of the Jewish People with Palestine.... Etc. Unquote. No one can dispute Israel's right to return and redeem this part of its MOTHERLAND, be it Judea, Samaria or any other part of the Mandate, for this right is firmly implanted in International Law, Archeology, Historical Association, Security and Political Justice. P.S. ARTICLE 6 The Administration of Palestine, while ensuring that the rights and position of other section of the population are not prejudiced, shall facilitate Jewish immigration under suitable conditions and shall encourage, in co-operation with the Jewish agency referred to in Article 4, close settlement by Jews on the land, including State lands and waste lands not required for public purposes. And speaking of 242... Jordan conquered Judea and Samaria killed its Jewish inhabitants, and the rest were moved beyond their jurisdiction, destroyed more than Fifty Jewish Temples and schools, upturned tomb markers and used them for camp passages and latrines... of course according to you 242 applies only to Jews who did not move any Arab Population and did not kill or move its residents. To make frivolous declamations is wonderful but evenhandedness is also required in a civil discourse.
You know why it's not nifty fiction ? Because there is NONE, ZERO, NADA legal and human rights issues surrounding the Syrian conflict. Arabs don't live with words, they live eat & sleep with swords.
Your enormous faith in Professor Eugene Kontorovich is noted. I note that he is an international expert on piracy at Northwestern Law. However being an expert does not mean that he is honest. We have seen posters on this forum who have been provided with undeniable facts, yet they ignore them and continue to regurgitate the truth according to the Zionist Nationalist agenda. You know who I mean So, as Erskine Childers advised in 1961, let us check the Professor for honestly and professional conduct, shall we? Oh, by the way, I listened to the entire video and took copious notes. So I am fully qualified to report the following on the Professors professional integrity. IT SUCKS!! And here is why: 1) At 03:28 the Prof states that the General Assembly does not make international law. At 03:32 he justifies this by stating that the UN charter (which IS international law) spells out the role of the GA and it is not to make international law. Its decisions are not binding: Let us check that. [Click here for source reference]. Chapter IV spells out the rules regarding the General Assembly. Specifically Article 18(2) gives the GA the sole right admit new members to the UN. This is a piece of International Law which DOES fall directly in the ambit of the GA. Those decisions on member state admission are binding. The Professor was therefore wrong, and that is not a matter of subjective opinion but of referenced fact. Expect The Apologists to quote Kontorovich as proof that the GAs acceptance of Palestine as a Member observer State was illegal. They too would be wrong as we have just seen 2) At 11:00 Kontorovich asks Who is the League of Nations? and then immediately answers The League of Nations is everyone. Now I cannot believe that a Professor of International Law does not know the facts. Therefore he must be deliberately trying to deceive his audience. Because the LoN was NOT everyone. At its greatest extent the LoN had 58 members. During the critical period which Kontorovich discussed, the early 1920s, Russia was not a member, nor were Turkey, Saudi Arabia or Germany. Most critically perhaps, the USA was NEVER a member. So Kontorovich lies when he claims that the whole world approved the Palestinian Mandate. 3) At 11:08 he commits a HUGE and GROSS blunder. It is such a colossal blunder that it destroys all the value of this video because this keystone in Kontorovichs argument is a lie, and he knows it is. Here are his words and Britain was going to create a Jewish STATE in Palestine. Note that this expert on International Law glibly inserted 'State' in the place of the word 'Homeland' - with no notice nor discussion. The man is an out-and-out fraud, not to be trusted. He compounds this at 11:25 by claiming that the entire Mandate for Palestine was meant for the creation of a Jewish State. He is a liar of the most obnoxious type because he is meant to an expert in this field. And then he goes on to repeat this lie at least a dozen times. I know that those are harsh words, but they are deserved. I defy any reader to visit the exact words of the Mandate for Palestine as approved by the LoN [the exact text can be found here] and show us where it ever mentions a Jewish State. It does not. Nowhere. Hence my conclusions regarding Kontorovich's ethics - the very document which he pretends to be so familiar with clearly demonstrates his fraud. I am not sure that there is any need to go further. Kontorovichs cornerstone proof for the Legal case for Israel is hereby destroyed. All the rest that follows is therefore fluff. So, HBendor, Shivas position is only strengthened by this proof that your key witness is a charlatan. Erkine Childers was proved to be correct yet again. The Zionist Apologist "Expert" cannot be trusted
First of all Judea and Samaria haven't existed for over 2000 years and there is no such territory. Transjordan was created as it's own political entity in 1921 under the admistrative authority (not ownership) of Great Britian that was assigned to it as the Mandatory at the end of WW I. It was completely separate from Palestince. Next is the fact that regardless of adminstrative rule the land belongs to the People, which in Palestine were predominately non-Jewish Muslims even in 1948. Finally is the fact that Israel was created illegally in violation of International Law in 1948. All of the Zionist BS propaganda notwithstanding anyone that actually reads history knows that the propaganda is based upon half-truths and lies. The European Jews had no claim to any part of Palestine after WW I as Palestine belonged to the Palestinian People that were predominately Arab Muslims as well as minority populations of Jews and Christians. Palestine, while under British Adminstrative Authority, belonged to the Palestinian People and not to European Jews. The immigration of European Jews to create a Jewish State starting after WW I was literally a foreign invasion to overthrow the lawful establishment of government by the Palestinian People under the British Mandatory as established by the League of Nations. This invasion of European Jews resulted in a revolution where the "European" Jews fundamentally declared war on the Palestinian People, to which Palestine belonged, in 1948. Once again I will point out that Israel established a religious/ethnic "aparthied" Jewish nation that is fundamentally no different than the apartheid S Africa or Nazi Germany. Zionists can say all they want. they can spread as much BS half-truths and lies as they want, but in the end they're going to have to admit that they're no better than Nazi Germany. The only reason there aren't Palestinian Death Camps in Israel is because the Zionists know that the world won't tolerate it. It is not because the Zionists have any interests in protectiong the Rights of the Palestinians that they have been violating for roughly 90 years in Palestine.
Ottoman Empire showing Levant 1517-1917 - before Anglo-French carve up. There's Suriya-Filistin-Misir-Hijaz - No Israel -Judea-Sameria or Jordan ...
I have a map from the 1st century without any of the countries in your map.. and another map from the 8th century without Suriya-Filistin-Misir-Hijaz .. I think i can find a map which was drown before Muslim was invented.. What's your point !!???
Really ? instead of your say so , let's see it then we can compare notes before continuing the discussion .
Not all of Jordan... ... just the plains of Moab... ... which is the southwest section of Jordan... ... it's geographically based... ... not politically based... ... which is a big enough area... ... to let the Palestinians have their own state... ... instead of taking land from Israel.
The whole territory was PALESTINE inhabited for over a thousand years by Palestinians - Filisteen there was no Israelis before 1948. Present day Jews are not the biblical/mythical runaway Egyptian slaves who became tribal " He-brews" who stole the land of Canaan to create an "Israel " - which soon degenerated collapsed into a Civil War establishing a Judea /Judah etc which was also soon dispersed - punished by their god for their vile practices + disobedience. Go read - go learn . ,
Absolutely correct whether the territory West of the Jordan River was called Palestine or not. A territory belongs to the People that live there, period. It doesn't belong to people from other nations and the immigration of foreigners to take away the territory from the residents is a violation of the inalienable Rights of Citizenship of the established residents of a territory. This was true with the Zionist European immigration to Palestine to create the nation of Israel as well as the more recent Israeli immigration into the West Bank and E Jerusalem after the 1967 War in violation of International Law as established by Article 49 of the Geneva Conventions.
The palestinians are Beduim tribes which roamed the deserts of Libya, Egypt and Sudan until they settled in Canaan early last century. Some of them came from their homeland in Jordan. "Palestine" is a new invention invented by arabs to conquer the jewish nation. Palestinians GO BACK TO YOUR HOME - JORDAN. P.s - The Beduim in the Israeli "Negev" desert and in the Egyptian "Sinai" desert hate the palestinians.
Excellent, MGB Roadster. Finally a word of truth from you. You admit that Jordan is a Bedouin homeland. CONGRATULATIONS!!! Please allow me to bookmark that quote from you.  Crucial quote from the MGB Roadster – Jordan is a Bedouin nation. As for the rest of your post: MYTH ALERT!!! MYTH ALERT!!! MYTH ALERT!!! 1) Prof Israel Finkelstein, the foremost Israeli archaeologist on Bronze/Iron age Palestine, Professor of the Archaeology at Tel Aviv University, says that you are full of BS. His work over 30 years shows a link of the Palestinians AND THE JEWS to the Canaanites and other ancient occupants of the southern Levant. 2) Prof Ariela Oppenheim of the Hebrew University in Jerusalem says you are drooling crap. Her genetic studies show a link between the Jews and the Palestinians which dates back many centuries. In fact her work shows that the Palestinians carry the priestly Cohen gene just as the Jews do. They are blood brothers. 3) HBendor quoted numerous European writers from the early 19th Century (note – not early “last Century” who confirm the Palestinian presence in ‘the Holy Land’. 4) Christian writers confirm that when Saladin defeated the Crusaders in 1187 they were greeted by a multitude of “olive growers and shepherds” from the hills around Jerusalem. Were these Bedouin nomads? The subsequent Mamluks confirm being supplied with “fruit, meat and barley” by the “hill peoples”. In 1834 Abdullah Pasha, the governor of Acre, toured the sanjaks of Jerusalem and Nablus “and was pleased with what he saw; fellahin of the land were tending their crops and herds”. These were also Bedouin? See Maurus Reinkowski’s work on the late Ottoman empire in Palestine - http://www.freidok.uni-freiburg.de/...inkowski_Late_Ottoman_rule_over_Palestine.pdf but more importantly, refer to Albert Hourani’s work “Arabic Thought in the Liberal Age 1789-1939”. If those are too high-brow for you try A History of Palestine: From the Ottoman Conquest to the Founding of the State of Israel by Gudrun Krämer of the Free University Berlin. Her uncomplicated and unbiased analysis is refreshing. 5) Who were the people that Baruch Kimmerling and Joel S. Migdal consider to have fomented the 1834 revolt of the Arabs in Palestine which in their opinion was the origin of Palestinian nationalism? Where did you pick up that nonsense about the origins of the Palestinians being Bedouin people of the early 20thC? Please provide a credible and verifiable reference, because at the moment it looks awfully like a wet thumb.
