Greater Israel - It is "Liberated Territory" No Arab land in Israel is occupied by Israel
The various clashes between the Arab-Palestinians and the Israelis and the fighting in the Gaza Strip needs
clarification for people to understand its genesis. I accept that the situation
is complex. US President, Barack Obama has so far not been educated enough as
to the true intentions of the Arabs is to destroy Israel.
clarification for people to understand its genesis. I accept that the situation
is complex. US President, Barack Obama has so far not been educated enough as
to the true intentions of the Arabs is to destroy Israel.
However, I would like to bring out what seems to have been ignored, overlooked and yet it is extremely important
for a balanced analysis of the Arab Israel Conflict.
for a balanced analysis of the Arab Israel Conflict.
Whereas on the surface it is the terrorist group, Hamas and other Arab terrorist groups, fighting the only
Jewish State, Israel, it is in fact a continuation of the war that Arabs have
waged against the Jews since Israel was reestablished as a sovereign nation in 1948.
Jewish State, Israel, it is in fact a continuation of the war that Arabs have
waged against the Jews since Israel was reestablished as a sovereign nation in 1948.
The geographic area called “Palestine” was governed by the British after it
took it from the Ottoman Empire - Turks at the end of the First World War. If you check the land registration records, you will find that over 90% of the land in Palestine was owned by the government. A good
percentage of the balance was purchased by the Jewish people at premium prices,
(See the testimony of the Mufti of Jerusalem in 1937 in front of the British Peel Commission).
took it from the Ottoman Empire - Turks at the end of the First World War. If you check the land registration records, you will find that over 90% of the land in Palestine was owned by the government. A good
percentage of the balance was purchased by the Jewish people at premium prices,
(See the testimony of the Mufti of Jerusalem in 1937 in front of the British Peel Commission).
The San Remo Treaty of 1920 was adopted by The League of Nations
(precursor to the United Nations), according to the Balfour Declaration of
1917, it mandated Britain as trustee for the Jewish people, to create a Jewish
state in all of “Palestine” due to historical right. The San Remo Treaty of 1920 assigning Palestine to the Jewish people and having exclusive political rights was also adopted by
the 1920 treaty of Sevres and Treaty of Lausanne July 23, 1923
and the treaty of Sevres. August 1920 Treaty of Sèvres,
articles 94 and 95 recapitulating the San Remo Resolution (**see below)
(precursor to the United Nations), according to the Balfour Declaration of
1917, it mandated Britain as trustee for the Jewish people, to create a Jewish
state in all of “Palestine” due to historical right. The San Remo Treaty of 1920 assigning Palestine to the Jewish people and having exclusive political rights was also adopted by
the 1920 treaty of Sevres and Treaty of Lausanne July 23, 1923
and the treaty of Sevres. August 1920 Treaty of Sèvres,
articles 94 and 95 recapitulating the San Remo Resolution (**see below)
The decisions of the San Remo conference confirmed the mandate allocations of the First Conference of London (February 1920). The San Remo Resolution adopted on 25 April 1920 incorporated the Balfour Declaration of 1917.
It and Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations were the basic documents upon which the British Mandate for Palestine was constructed. Under the Balfour Declaration, the British government had undertaken to the establishment of a Jewish national home in Palestine without prejudice to 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. Britain received the mandate for Palestine and Iraq;
France gained control of Syria, including present-day Lebanon. Under the agreement,
Great Britain granted France 25 percent of the oil
production from Mosul and France undertook to deliver
oil to the Mediterranean. The draft peace agreement with Turkey signed at the
conference became the basis for the 1920 Treaty of Sèvres. Germany was called upon to
carry out its military and reparation obligations under the Versailles Treaty,
and a resolution was adopted in favor of restoring trade with Russia.[12]
It and Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations were the basic documents upon which the British Mandate for Palestine was constructed. Under the Balfour Declaration, the British government had undertaken to the establishment of a Jewish national home in Palestine without prejudice to 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. Britain received the mandate for Palestine and Iraq;
France gained control of Syria, including present-day Lebanon. Under the agreement,
Great Britain granted France 25 percent of the oil
production from Mosul and France undertook to deliver
oil to the Mediterranean. The draft peace agreement with Turkey signed at the
conference became the basis for the 1920 Treaty of Sèvres. Germany was called upon to
carry out its military and reparation obligations under the Versailles Treaty,
and a resolution was adopted in favor of restoring trade with Russia.[12]
Recognizing that not all parts of the Middle East were ready for full
independence, mandates were established for the government of three
territories: Syria and Lebanon, Mesopotamia (Iraq) and Palestine. In each case, one of
the Allied Powers was assigned to implement the mandate until the territories
in question could "stand alone."
independence, mandates were established for the government of three
territories: Syria and Lebanon, Mesopotamia (Iraq) and Palestine. In each case, one of
the Allied Powers was assigned to implement the mandate until the territories
in question could "stand alone."
Tragically, Britain did not fulfill its mandate and instead
created a formerly nonexistent Arab-Palestinian state called “Transjordan” (now Jordan) on 77% of the Jewish soil in 1922. The British agenda was to retain control of the oil in the Middle East, for that they were willing to stab the Jews in the back.
created a formerly nonexistent Arab-Palestinian state called “Transjordan” (now Jordan) on 77% of the Jewish soil in 1922. The British agenda was to retain control of the oil in the Middle East, for that they were willing to stab the Jews in the back.
YJ Draiman
Media accuracy and unbiased reporting must be enforced
ReplyDeleteIt seems the Media cannot regulate itself to present a true and honest reporting.
Responsible and honest reporting has been replaced with ambiguous confusing and illusory news reports, with no regard to the consequences. Facts and sources are not properly verified and an inaccurate unsubstantiated news story gets released to the public, that may cause substantial harm.
What has happened to ethics in Journalism? Has Social Media added a new dimension to honest reporting? Can we overcome distorted Social Media for accuracy? How can we verify instant Social Media images from being photo-shopped? Can we impose responsible Social Media without affecting the freedom of speech?
Whether we like it or not, the masses are influenced by the Media, could you imagine how children and young adults absorb the Media hype, regardless weather it is truth or illusion. The damage is long term and may not be reversible. Children are very impressionable, they think what they see on TV emulate real life, which we know is distorted and make believe, they carry these illusions as reality which affects their future adversely.
The Media reporting must be neutral, unbiased, balanced, objective and impartial. Violators should be subject to fines and criminal charges if people suffer due to intentional distortion of reports or intentionally slanted to deceive or promote favoritism that escalates into violence and or cause harm and or financial loss.
When a Media outlet intentionally distorts and misinforms the news and events, it should forfeit the right to free speech and free press and face the music.
In the past decades Media outlets have expanded the creation of sensationalism to promote readership and revenues. These types of reports many times intentionally distorts the facts and true dimension of the report. Thus creating more dissention and crisis that leads to violence and death.
It seems that the Media today has no emotion, no compassion. Much of the news is choreographed for the sake of sensationalism and rating. Which comes down to dollars and financial gain. Society today is so hungry for money, power, instant gratification and glamour.
Is there a chance of going back to honor, honesty, integrity and fighting for truth and justice the old American way. Overcoming false showmanship and artificial presentation. Broadcasting truth and reality, thereby regaining public trust in the Media?
This very same rebuke and standards must be applied to our elected government officials.
A change for the better must be initiated and it must start at the top.
YJ Draiman
P.S. “The biases the media has are much bigger than conservative or liberal. They’re about getting ratings, about making money, about doing stories that are easy to cover and keeping us in a uproar.”
Terror
ReplyDelete“Let me explain to you what we – all of us -are up against. Classic warfare is fundamentally a contest of wills fought to impose so much stress on the enemy that he loses the will to fight. A war of terror has the same intent, but with a singularly insidious twist: the enemy can be anybody, anywhere. He is without uniform or identification. His targets are random. His weapon is fear. He knows no constraints. He comes in all guises, often in the dress of his victims. He seeks to shatter nerves and break morale by flaunting the impotence of the authorities to protect their people. He uses his own women and children as his shield. He seeks to goad the defender into ever-harsher counter measures so as to stoke the general hate. He goes all-out to sow despair and to brutalize the agitated hearts of the other side. And in so doing, he strives to corrupt the defender’s military professionalism and discipline through combat stress, demoralization, fatigue, boredom and overkill, the very things we have been talking about. Well” – this in a final arpeggio – “no enemy is going to brutalize our hearts, nor corrupt our military professionalism and discipline.
Israel - In order to consider a new negotiations
ReplyDeletewith the Arab-Palestinians
First thing, let us see the
Arab Palestinians stop teaching their children and the masses to commit terror
and violence. Stop rewarding terrorists, stop funding terrorists families, stop
naming streets after terrorists. Declare and practice that terror and violence
is unacceptable. We need to see a change in attitude towards terror and a true
and honest pursuit of peace and coexistence.
You can accomplish more with honey than with vinegar.
If that is not possible than
there will never be peace.
A true peace will be a blessing and an economic prosperity to all concerned.
YJ Draiman
Read this book it will give you information about Israel
ReplyDeleteFrom Time Immemorial: The Origins of the Arab-Jewish Conflict over Palestine Paperback – February 1, 2001
by Joan Peters (Author)
This monumental and fascinating book, the product of seven years of original research, will forever change the terms of the debate about the conflicting claims of the Arabs and the Jews in the Middle East.
The weight of the comprehensive evidence found and brilliantly analyzed by historian and journalist Joan Peters answers many crucial questions, among them: Why are the Arab refugees from Israel seen in a different light from all the other, far more numerous peoples who were displaced after World War II? Why, indeed, are they seen differently from the Jewish refugees who were forced, in 1948 and after, to leave the Arab countries to find a haven in Israel? Who, in fact, are the Arabs who were living within the borders of present-day Israel, and where did they come from?
Joan Peters's highly readable and moving development of the answers to these and related questions will appear startling, even to those on both sides of the argument who have considered themselves to be in command of the facts. On the basis of a definitive weight of hitherto unexamined population and other historical data, much of it buried in untouched archives, Peters demonstrates that Jews did not displace Arabs in Palestine-just the reverse: Arabs displaced Jews; that a hidden but major Arab migration and immigration took place into areas settled by Jews in pre-Israel Palestine; that a substantial number of the Arab refugees called Palestinians in reality had foreign roots; that for every Arab refugee who left Israel in 1948, there was a Jewish refugee who fled or was expelled from his Arab birthplace at the same time-today's much discussed Sephardic majority in Israel is in fact composed mainly of these Arab-born Jewish refugees or their offspring; that Britain, the Mandatory power, winked at and even encouraged Arab immigration into Palestine between the two World Wars; that by disguising the Arab immigrants as "indigenous native Palestinian Arabs," the British justified their restrictions on Jewish immigration and settlement, dooming masses of European Jews to destruction in the Nazi camps.
Joan Peters also unfolds a historical record to shatter the widely held belief that Arabs and Jews harmoniously coexisted for centuries in the Arab world-the fact is that the Jews, along with other non-Muslims, were second-class citizens, oppressed in the Muslim world for more than a millennium. And this continuing prejudicial tradition of hostility underlies, as well, every Arab action toward the state of Israel.
In addition to her pioneering archival researches, Joan Peters has frequently traveled in the Middle East, conducting numerous interviews and gathering the personal observations of the first-rate reporter she is. The result is a book that has already had a major impact on policy discussions of one of the most vital and intractable of the world's problems, shrouded until now in a fog of misinformation and ignorance.
The Jewish people war of survival was not won when Hitler lost. It continues to this day, against enemies with far more effective tools of mass murder at their disposal. Plus we are easy to find now.
ReplyDeleteThe West Bank (Judea and Samaria) was re-taken and liberated from
Jordan by Israel in 1967 after another failed Arab attempt at destroying the
young Jewish state and has been under Israel control ever since. In the Oslo accords
(which are now null and void), Israel tried to give the PA limited
supervision on a part of the area but it obviously did not work as the Arab
goal here is not the creation of a Palestinian state but simply the destruction
of the Jewish state. If they wanted a Palestinian state, they would have asked Jordan before 1967 for the territories. They never bothered (because they knew it was occupied Jewish territory) until Israel took over.
Israel must stop all Arab violence at all costs and restore security and safety to its citizens.
YJ Draiman
No entity in the world will force a solution on Israel.
ReplyDeleteThey forced or were complicit to the Final solution in WWII
with the Holocaust and the extermination of over 6 million Jewish people, men women and children.
Where were the worlds nations outcry, threats and objection
when millions of Jewish people were being exterminated, men women and children?
They were silent.
Where was the world nations when the Arab countries expelled
over a million Jewish people from their countries who lived there for over 1800 years, the Arabs confiscated their assets, business, homes and land 5 times the size of Israel, valued in the trillions of dollars?
Where is the world nations today? Why do they ignore when
thousands are slaughtered by Muslims throughout the world.
When Arab violence against Jews and other who are in Israel is not promoted by the Arab leaders, it is positive proof that the Arabs are no seeking peace and coexistence with Israel, the Arabs only seek Israel's destruction.
Any violence whatsoever must be responded with full force, Let them know this terror and violence, stone throwing and barricades is a crime and punishable by extreme actions. This is the only way to treat violence, anything less is a dereliction of duty by the government.
Today and since 1948. Israel is being
threatened with annihilation and when Israel defends itself
from destruction, suicide bombers, thousands of missiles, violence, etc, by the Arabs, every country has something to say, threaten Israel and meddle in its business.
This is the time when nations of the world must mind their own business and
stay out of Israel’s internal affairs. Only then there will be a possibility of peace.
NEVER AGAIN!!!
YJ
Draiman
Iran
the destabilizing factor in the Middle East
and beyond..
The underlying reason is because they wanted to appease the Arabs in order to get control of the oil.
ReplyDeleteThe oil as a political weapon has grown considerably since WWI.
The Arabs use it to their advantage every chance they get.
Today U.S. is again the largest producer of oil due to new technology and additional exploration. This has taken the oil advantage away from OPEC.
The land on which Israel was located today contained only a fraction of the Palestine Mandate originally dedicated to the Jews as their homeland, incorporating the Balfour Declaration. The San Remo Treaty and its affirmation in the 1920 Treaty of Sevres. Thus, 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.Historian Arnold Toynbee observed in 1918 that the "desolate" land "which lies east of the Jordan stream," was
capable of supporting a large population if irrigated and cultivated scientifically. ... The Jews have superior rights to this no-man's land and not the Arabs, who are encroachers from neighboring countries.
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 their ancestral land and settle there all 32,500 square miles or 84,174 sq km. .... and being further assured that it will be the policy of the League of Nations to recognize Palestine as a Jewish state and no other as soon as it is a Jewish state in fact. . . . England, as mandatory and as a trustee for the Jewish people, can be relied on to give the Jews the privileged position and exclusive political rights they should have without sacrificing the [religious and property] rights of non-Jews.
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"
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 .
But, in a strategic move, the British Government apparently felt "the need to assuage the Emir's [Abdullah's] feelings." As one of the royal sons of the Hejaz (Saudi Arabia), Abdullah was a recipient of British gratitude; the Arabians of the Hejaz had been, among all the Arab world, of singular assistance to England against the Turks8
The insertion of Abdullah and his emirate into mandated Palestine, in the area east of the Jordan River that was part of the land allocated to the "Jewish National Home," might be partially traced to a suggestion received by Colonial Secretary Winston Churchill from T. E. Lawrence. In a letter of January 1921, Lawrence informed Churchill that Emir Feisal (Abdullah's brother, and Lawrence "of Arabia's" choice to lead the Arab revolt)9 had "agreed to abandon all claim of his father to [Western] Palestine," if Feisal got in return Iraq and Eastern Palestine as Arab territories.
Keep dreaming it will not make it a reality.
ReplyDeleteThere was never an Arab-Palestinian State in Greater Israel and there will never be - face it.
The Ottoman land records of Palestine confirm that the Arabs did not own land, the were sharecroppers. Over 90% of the land was owned by the government the balance was owned by absentee wealthy Arabs from Lebanon who sold it to the Jews at premium prices.
The San Remo Treaty of 1920 was adopted by The League
ReplyDeleteof Nations (precursor to the United Nations), according to the Balfour
Declaration of 1917, it mandated Britain as trustee for the Jewish people, to
create a Jewish state in all of “Palestine” due to historical right. The San
Remo Treaty of 1920 assigning Palestine to
the Jewish people and having exclusive political rights was also adopted by the
1920 treaty of Sevres and Treaty of Lausanne July 23, 1923
and the treaty of Sevres. August
1920 Treaty of Sèvres, articles
94 and 95 recapitulating the San Remo Resolution