Originally posted by: Zebo
Originally posted by: TheSnowman
Originally posted by: Zebo
"Arab Occupied Judea and Samaria" should be substituted for "Israeli Occupied West Bank" if you read the clear intent of the Mandate for Palestine set up by the League of Nations - its mandates recognized and accepted by the United Nations.
No it shouldn't. Will you please quote whichever document it is which lead you to belive otherwise?
I told you the documents. Did you even read my post? Again Balfour declaration and Mandate for Palestine.
I did read your post, hence the reason I requested you quote from whichever document you belive supports your claim. Regardless, I'll start by quoting the Balfor Declaration of 1917:
Dear Lord Rothschild,
I have much pleasure in conveying to you, on behalf of His Majesty's Government, the following declaration of sympathy with Jewish Zionist aspirations which has been submitted to, and approved by, the Cabinet:
"His Majesty's Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, 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".
I should be grateful if you would bring this declaration to the knowledge of the Zionist Federation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B...ur_Declaration_of_1917
Note the bolded part above, the right to establish a Jewish homeland in Palestine has always been limited to what can be accomplished without infringing upon the rights of the existing population.
The League of Nations Mandate for Palestine 1917 repeates this limitation exactly:
Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have also agreed that the Mandatory should be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2nd, 1917, by the Government of His Britannic Majesty, and adopted by the said Powers, in favour of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might 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
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/1922mandate.html
Originally posted by: Zebo
Furthermore the argument that Aza, Judea and Samaria (notice the Jewish names long before 'west bank' and 'gaza' both modern constructions) are occupied or colonized territories by Israel is based upon revisionist history.
I am familiar with the history, and have no interest in revising it. I do however use the names commonly acccepted today so that others can more easly understand what I say. How can you take issue with this? Would you call the vast majort of the world a revsionists? Including a majorty of Israelis, mainstream news, as well as our own President here in the US?:
Israeli Obligations:
The Government of Israel is committed to take additional steps on the West Bank, including progress toward a freeze on settlement activity, removing unauthorized outposts, and improving the humanitarian situation by easing restrictions on the movement of Palestinians not engaged in terrorist activities.
http://www.ujc.org/page.aspx?id=64059
Granted, what Bush says and what he does are often have little relation, but it seems nearly everyone is trying to revise history from your perspective, eh?
Originally posted by: Zebo
The Jews have lived there for over 2,000 years.
The vast majority of Jews haven't lived there since the Kingdom of Israel in Samaria fell to the Assyrians, and the Kingdom of Judah fell to the Babylonians, culminating with the destruction of the First Temple in 587 BCE. Furthermore, while the region you call Azza has long had a Jewish name, it was never part of any Jewish kingdom.
Originally posted by: Zebo
The Arabs who live there now are almost entirely made up of those Arabs thrown out of Jordan during the Arafat era there and their descendants.
It is the Arabs that are the invaders into Aza, Judea and Samaria not the Jews.
Israel has strictly controlled who gets in and out of the territories since the begining of the occupation in 1967. The only Arabs thrown out of Jordan were the PLO, and they went to Lebanon, Israel had no interest in letting them in the West Bank or Gaza. The Arabs who number 2.5 million in the West Bank now, along with the other 1.5 million in Gaza. Those lived there since before Israel started occupying and colonizing those territories in 1967, along with Arabs once lived what is now Israel prior to 1948, and their descendants. Furthermore, many of Jordan's current citizens are decent from Arabs who lived in what is now Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza today.
Originally posted by: Zebo
The Jews are defending their homeland for over 2,000 years which was firstly taken from them by Babylonians, then the Romans, then various Sultans, then the Ottoman empire and finally falling into the hands of the British before partially being given back to the Jews in 1948.
Again, Israel divided on it's own, over 2.500 years ago, with the North falling to Assyrians and driving Israelites there in to exile. Then the South fell to Babylonians, who destroyed the First Temple and took the Kingdom of Judah to captivity in Babylon. Then, Persia conquered the Babylonians, allowing Jews to reconstruct their kingdom under Persian rule, and the Second Temple was built. Then the Persian Empire fell to the Greeks, Jews in the region revolted from the Greeks, but later fell to the Romans, who drove what Jews were there back into exile, and destroyed the Second Temple.
Romans split and the Byzantine Empire kept the land and named it Palaestina, which has since come to understood as Palestine. Then, Persians briefly conquered the land, but fell to Muslim Caliph, who fell to the Crusaders, who then fell to the Mamluk Sultanate. Then Ottomans conquered the region, lost it to Egypt briefly, but allied with the British and took it back, only to finally fall to the Allied Powers of WWI. That brings us back to the The League of Nations Mandate for Palestine mentioned above, which again insists "
nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine." That population which has been developing in the region since the Crusaders were driven out over 700 years ago.
Perhaps now you might understand why Israel's ongoing colonization of Palestinian land in the West Bank is the terrorists most effective recruitment tool?
Facebook
Twitter