HISTORY OF (PALESTINE) ISRAEL 101

HISTORY OF (PALESTINE) ISRAEL 101

HISTORY OF PALESTINE ISRAEL 101

***Special opportunity at the end of the post to say 'Thank you' to IDF soldiers***

 The Middle East is a mess. I don’t think there’s a person reading this blog who doesn’t understand the mess and the danger that looms over the Middle East. You might be inclined to think I was referring to the mess between Israel and what is commonly called Palestine. NOPE! The Middle East is much bigger than a country whose area is a small 8000 sq. miles. Some of you might not even know what the Middle East looks like. So here you go; a map of the Middle East. Try to find Israel



Israel is the small sliver like peach colored area between Egypt and Syria (might be a bit difficult to see)

Enough boring facts, let’s get to the chase. The whole world is screaming at Israel for occupying Palestine.  A treacherous story is told. The Zionists came into Palestine and with great cruelty ran the Palestinians out of their prosperous thousand year old State. If this were true I would probably be a pro Palestine supporter myself! How can one possible sit by and watch a nation that was stripped of their land by intruding forces?!  Unfortunately for them and very fortunate for the people of Israel the story of this great land is quite different.

WHO ART THOU PALESTINE?

Let’s go back to the beginning. No, not to Abraham or Moses, I am not going to bore you with bible facts , which would be too easy. Let’s go back to when Palestine was first founded. No, it was not an Arab country or State; in fact it had absolutely nothing to do with the Arabs.

In 539 B.C. the Persians conquered the Babylonians. The Jewish Temple, destroyed by the Babylonians, was rebuilt (516 BC). Under Persian rule the Jewish state enjoyed considerable autonomy. Alexander the Great of Macedon, conquered the area in 333 BC His successors, the Ptolemies and Seleucids, contested for control. The attempt of the Seleucid Antiochus IV (Antiochus Epiphanes) to impose Hellenism brought a Jewish revolt under the Maccabees, who set up a new Jewish state in 142 BC The state lasted until 63 BC, when Pompey conquered the region for Rome

When Jesus  was around, the Jewish state was ruled by puppet kings of the Romans, the Herods. When the Jews revolted in 66 AD, the Romans destroyed the Temple in Jerusalem (70 AD). The Bar Kokba revolt between 132 and 135 AD was also suppressed, Jericho and Bethlehem were destroyed, and the Jews were barred from Jerusalem. The Roman Emperor Hadrian determined to wipe out the identity of Israel-Judah-Judea. Therefore, he took the name Palastina and imposed it on all the Land of Israel. At the same time, he changed the name of Jerusalem to Aelia Capitolina. The Romans killed many Jews and sold many more in slavery. Some of those who survived left the devastated country (and established Jewish communities throughout the Middle East) but there was never a complete abandonment of the Land of Israel. 

In other words when the Roman empire conquered or occupied the Land of Israel from the JEWS they renamed it Palestine in an attempt to strip the Nation of Israel from their natural right to the land of Israel. 

It always makes me laugh that Arabs use the same name as the Romans with the same goal in mind; to try to strip the Jews of their natural right to the Land of Israel!

Let’s fast forward a bit to Islamic times. From 1517-1917 Turkey's Ottoman Empire controlled a vast Arab empire, a portion of which is today Lebanon, Syria, and Palestine.  During World War I (1914-1918), Turkey supported Germany.

When Germany was defeated, so were the Turks. In 1916 control of the southern portion of their Ottoman Empire was "mandated" to France and Britain under the Sykes-Picot Agreement, which divided the Arab region into zones of influence. Lebanon and Syria were assigned (mandated) to France... and "Palestine" (today's Jordan, Israel and "West Bank") was mandated to Great Britain.  

Because no other peoples had ever established a national homeland in "Palestine" since the Jews were exiled 2,000 years before, the British "looked favorably" upon the creation of a Jewish National Homeland throughout ALL of Palestine. The Jews had already begun mass immigration into Palestine in the 1880's in an effort to rid the land of swamps and malaria and prepare for the rebirth of Israel. This Jewish effort to revitalize the land attracted an equally large immigration of Arabs from neighboring areas who were drawn by employment opportunities and healthier living conditions. There was never any attempt to "rid" the area of what few indigenous Arabs there were or those Arab masses thatimmigrated into this area along with the Jews! 

This is what Palestine looked like during the British Mandate.

The Balfour declaration of 1917 clearly states the Establishment of a Jewish homeland in the area known as Palestine. There was no split between the West and East bank of the Jordan River and the Jewish State was to be established on what was known as British Palestine, all of it.



Although Britain promised a Jewish homeland throughout the area known as Palestine His Majesty betrayed those promises in 1922.

In September 1922 the Council of the League of Nations recognized Transjordan as a state under the British Mandate and Transjordan memorandum excluded the territories east of the River Jordan from all of the provisions of the mandate dealing with Jewish settlement.  The country remained under British supervision until 1946.

What was promised to be the Jewish homeland of over 40,000 sq miles was now only 8,000 sq ml. This deceitful betrayal of the British Mandate towards the Jews faced absolutely no consequence. There was no Jewish uprising against the British, no terrorist attacks or murders. The Jews were happy with the 8000 sq. ml. homeland that was now promised to them.
From 1946 the State known as Jordan occupied what was 85% of British Mandate Palestine. The West side of the Jordan River was left for the Jewish homeland. 

Things could have ended there and we all could have lived happily ever after. However the Muslim population was not comfortable with Jews in the area.

Over the next 20 years Arabs murdered raped and violently terrorized Jewish communities in the area of British Palestine. The most famous of the massacres took place in the City of Hebron. 67 Jews viscously murdered by Arab rioters. The murders took place with the help of axes, rocks and knives. The Jewish population of Hebron was violently liquidated for the holy city of Hebron. Several Women were raped by Muslim rioters and others beheaded. 

Hebron Jew had his hand chopped off by an Arab axe

On November 29^th, 1947 the General assembly of the UN adopted a plan to Partition the 15% of what was left of Palestine in order to create a SECOND Arab State in Palestine alongside a small Jewish one.

The UN’s second partition of Palestine left the Jewish homeland with a mini State alongside an Arab Jordan and a second Arab State on the Eastern side of the Jordan River.

This Partition plan was a terrible slap in the face to the Zionist movement. The Jewish State would be tiny and the holy cities Jerusalem and Hebron would not be included.

The nation of Israel had waited two thousand years to come home and were not about to miss the opportunity to rebuild the Land of Israel. With mix feelings the Jews accepted the UN partition plan which left only 6% of what was originally promised to the Jews by the British.

Not surprisingly it was the Arabs who refused the Partition Plan. This refusal was not about land or about refugees or walls or occupation. It was about the refusal of Arabs to accept a Jewish State, anywhere and any size.

Let there not be any misunderstanding. It was not the Palestinian nation, State or leadership that refused the Partition. It was the Arab League. There was never an Arab Palestinian State or Government in the Area known as Palestine.

There were several official Palestinian objects which would give witness to a Palestinian entity.



Unfortunately for those who call themselves Palestinian, all these items are JEWISH! The Palestine Post was a JEWISH newspaper as was the Bank of Palestine. In fact there is absolotely no record of anything Arab that would hint to an Arab Palestine Government or State.
That’s simply because there never was such an entity!

This flag did NOT exist officially till 1964

Egyptian born Yasser Arafat was the first ever Palestine Government official in history. This happened in 1964 

DID ISRAEL EVER FIGHT THE PALESTINIANS?

 

Top right - 1948 Arab Invasion / Top Left - 1956 Arab Invasion
Bottom Left 1967 Arab Invasion / 1973 Arab Invasion

Over the past 64 years of Israel’s existence she had to fight numerous wars. Neither of them involved a Palestinian army. 

After the 1948 Arabinvasion of Israel and for the next 18 years the Arabs had control over the whole west bank, Gaza, Sinai and Jerusalem. In those 18 years there was never an attempt or even a request to declare a Palestinian State on the land conquered by the Arab armies.

This is a map of the Armistice lines after the 1948 Arab invasion of Israel. This is what is called the   ‘GREEN LINE’.  As you can see on the map the Green Line has nothing to do with a Palestinian State or rights of any kind.

 Jerusalem was in the hand of Jordan, Gaza belonged to Egypt and the Golan Heights was part of Syria.

Ignoring the fact that Israel liberated these areas after the Arab armies attacked again in 1967, the Palestinians have absolutely nothing to do with the GREEN LINE and Israel simply never occupied an Arab Palestine.

The next time you chose to argue with me (Israel_shield) on twitter, or scream from the top of your lungs that Israel “Occupied” Palestine I am going to kindly ask you to check your history.

Palestinian propaganda has lied to the world long enough. One would expect of institutions like the UN to learn history and not allow the Arabs to fabricate it in order to intentionally hold on to an anti Israel opinions.

Here Is Why I Remember The Holocaust And It's Not What You Expect!

Once a year the entire nation of Israel commemorated the six million that were murdered by the Nazis and their collaborators. At exactly 10:00 am, sirens sound throughout the Jewish State and most of Israel's citizens (Except the Arabs who deny the Holocaust and some radical Ultra Orthodox Jews who call themselves religious) stood in silence to remember and give respect to those who were murdered, burned, gassed and dehumanized by the Nazis and their collaborators. 

Some keep their eyes shut in total silence remembering a family member who was murdered and some whisper a prayer in honor of the six million innocent Jewish souls that were violently ripped from this world.

Most years, I belong to the second group, but this year, I was lost in thought asking myself, why? Why remember? 

What is it about that horrible time in Jewish and human history that is so important to remember? My grandmother (Z"L) who survived numerous camps, saved other Jews will never be forgotten by me so why is it important to have a national memory of such a tragedy? What exactly am I remembering? 

Is there someone who actually believes that our memory will prevent another Holocaust from happening? Look around! 

Syria is murdering tens of thousands of people by gas and chemical weapons, Russia is conquering Ukraine and let's not even get started with the amount of people who are being slaughtered throughout Africa! 
Has the world learned anything?
My answer is an absolute NOT A THING! 

Obama is a joke and has threatened Syria time and time again that if they dare use chemical weapons, the US will be forced to react. Hello? Does Obama watch the news?



Some say that the Holocaust should not be mixed up with politics, I say WRONG! Only when remembering just what the world did can one have total political clarity. The ability to remember an American President who flew over the train tracks to Auschwitz with fighter planes but refused to bomb them so not to make any politically "trouble" or the way the entire world kept silent as millions were gassed, burned and shot!  

On July 7, shortly after the U.S. War Department refused requests from Jewish leaders to bomb the railway lines leading to the camps, a force of 452 Fifteenth Air Force bombers flew along and across the five deportation railway lines on their way to bomb Blechhammer oil refineries nearby

To remember a British leader who met, shook hands and was actually on the brink of signing an agreement with Hitler because he didn't believe Hitler was a real threat!

The Munich Agreement

And let us not forget our Muslim neighbors who seek "peace" with the Jewish State and claim that all our problems started when the modern day State of Israel was born in 1948. 

Taken in 1943! No State No Settlements Just Islamic Anti Semitism!

Brothers, sisters, mothers and fathers were burned, gassed and treated like animals and the world said NOTHING! Nothing from France, nothing from England, Nothing from America, Nothing from anyone! 

What do I learn from the Holocaust? I learn that the State of Israel is the ONLY true safe haven for Jews and we cannot trust anyone with our safety, security, military or Jewish survival. 

Barack Obama and John Kerry say they are our friends but they have been pressuring Israel into handing over more parts of the Land of Israel to Muslim occupiers and have recently forced use to make a ceasefire with a fanatic Islamic terrorists organization called HAMAS! 

Instead of the US President and Vice president siding with the Jewish State that has the same basic morals as the US, they have taken sides with the people who hold the same terrorist ideology that was responsible for the murder of over 3,000 people when they blew up the twin towers!

When Abu Mazen signs an agreement with the terrorist organization Hamas, John Kerry blames Israel and warns that if Israel doesn't make peace (give in to their demands) soon, the Arabs will start killing Jews! Really? Does that sound like a friend to you? To me it sounds like blackmail!

This Is Hamas!

Then Kerry says it was Israel's refusal to release terrorists as well as the building of houses and kindergartens in JERUSALEM that is to blame for the failed peace process. Of course the fact that Abu Mazen has completely refused to recognize a Jewish State has absolutely nothing to do with it, right John! I am not even going to get started with the Hamas missile fire that the White House said nothing about till Israel reacted! 

Recently Obama had refused a missile shipment to Israel in solidarity with the people of Gaza ( who voted in Hamas)

When I say NEVER AGAIN! I mean it and the time is now! Unfortunately not only is the world ignoring the dangers Israel is facing, Israel's leaders themselves are behaving exactly like the Jews in 1939 who didn't believe anything would really happen! 

Bibi, the Arabs have no right to this land! Can they live here in peace? Yes! The Druze do, The Christians do and yes, there are plenty of Muslim Arabs who just want to live, but the second they talk of a national country within the Land of Israel, it's time to say it loud and clear, NO WAY! 

Read Also: The History Of Palestine 101

The motto 'NEVER AGAIN' has nothing to do with the Nazis. They like the Romans, Greeks and the Mussolini's are all gone. Never again means we will never again be so naive to believe the world when they say they will do something about the powers of evil, especially when those powers threaten Israel or the Jews! We now know that even our greatest allies and friends will fly right over our heads and ignore the flames that burn our flesh! We know that their political standing is more important than morality and certainly more important than a couple of Jews burning or being blown up by Muslim terrorists. 

What do I learn from the Holocaust? There is only God to rely on and he is given us back the Land Of Israel as well as the IDF so that NEVER AGAIN will this little boy march to his death with his hands up in the air! 

---

Don't forget to join me on the IsraelShield Facebook Page as well as on @israel_shield on Twitter  to join the online debates!. We Always Win, We Can't Afford To Lose!

A Jewish right to a Jewish land

Posted on 09/02/2014 @ 12:34 PM

By Rabbi Lazer Gurkow

The Rebbe of Gur was visited by an official of the British Mandate. In the course of conversation the official informed the Rebbe that the British were poised to move out and leave Israel to the Jews. The Rebbe’s reply was a Yiddishism – “Mi-Chi-Teise,” an idiom loosely translated as "let it be." Unsure of how to translate the Rebbe’s response, the interpreter said, “The Rebbe is pleased with the news.”

After the interview the interpreter asked the Rebbe why he was so casual in his response. The Rebbe replied, “G-d promised the land to our forefather Abraham, to our forefather Isaac and to our forefather Jacob. The British also want to promise us this land? Nu, Mi-Chi-Teise,” let it be…”

This is the true Jewish perspective of why Israel belongs to the Jews. We don’t require legal arguments or scientific proof to justify our claim to Israel.

To us, Israel and the Jew belong to each other because it is inherent in our heritage. It is enshrined in the Bible, where it wasn’t only promised us, but given to us.

That archeology, sociology and anthropology buttress this claim is superfluous to the Jew.

It’s nice to know that our tradition is corroborated, but it is hardly surprising to us nor is it necessary. It is not for science or history that we lay claim to Israel. It is our G-d given right.

Yet Jews often shy away from making the Biblical claim outright. You hear Jews speak of the United Nations Vote for Partition in 1948. You hear Jews speak of a historical right to reclaim the land of our ancestors, but rarely does one hear Jews speak publicly about a G-d given right enshrined in the Bible.

The obvious reason is that such a claim would subject us to the counter-claim that Islam has its own tradition, its own holy book and isn’t subject to ours. While this is true, it essentially allows the other side to dictate the conversation. If we don’t claim our Biblical right out of respect for Islam and the secular west, we essentially discard our best, and truthfully our only, argument.

It is well known that some early Zionists weren’t particular about Israel. As secular European Jews, their chief aim was to secure a homeland for Jews. They were willing to establish this land wherever they could.

The British offered to provide a Jewish homeland in Uganda and in principle, the early Zionists weren’t opposed. It was ultimately rejected, as Herzl told the Zionist Congress in 1903, because no other land would motivate Jews to accept marching orders. Only Israel holds that resonance and drama, and only Israel has the historical connection for our people that could (should?) not be negated or denied.

This is the only true reason Jews live in Israel today. It isn’t a gift of the UN and it is not ours by right of conquest. It isn’t ours on account of history, it is ours because G-d made it so.

Had the UN given us California, we would not have gone. Had the Jewish people defeated the Nazis in the Warsaw Ghetto, they would not have claimed that land.

Jews would only leave their homes and businesses for the Holy Land, given us by G-d.

The land whose loss we never stopped mourning and for whose shores, we never stopped yearning.

The land of our fathers, the land of our glory, the land of our home, the land of our soul; only that land that would move the nation.

No other land would do.

Let us face the truth. The only reason we are in Israel is because it belongs to us and we belong to it. It is no less a part of our Jewishness than the Torah.

Of the 613 commandments, 343 are unique to the land of Israel. We can survive anywhere, but we can thrive only there. Plainly put, if Israel weren’t ours, we wouldn’t have had a homeland. Should we deny this essential truth only because Islam isn’t not prepared to accept it?

Instead we devise all kinds of new arguments. We claim it is ours because the UN gave it to us. That is a weak argument. The UN dictates all manner of things to Israel that Israel conveniently ignores. If the UN’s authority suffices to create the land, it should suffice to dictate to the land. If we won’t accept its dictates, how can we claim its partition?

We use the argument of our historical right, but it too doesn’t work. If the tribes indigenous to America and Canada were to take up to arms to reclaim their historical lands, international law wouldn’t support them. The fact is that when Jews returned to Israel to establish a government, there was an indigenous community on the land. We can’t just displace them because we lived there thousands of years earlier.

In fact, even if we posit that Jews lived in Israel thousands of years earlier, what of the tribes we conquered and displaced when we arrived? If historical rights are claimed, the descendants of those tribes should be located and awarded the land. In addition to Jews, Hittites, Philistines, Jebusites, Assyrians, Babylonians, Greeks, Romans, Byzantines and the Turks all controlled Israel at some point. How do we determine whose it really is? That we cannot identify the descendants of these nations doesn’t justify our claim to it.

The only conclusive and resounding argument for a Jewish right to a Jewish land, is the Biblical one. G-d gave it to us. It is only through this argument that the others make sense. They buttress our G-d given right, but they can’t stand as independent arguments.

As He gave it, He also took it. We mourn the destruction of our Temple and the loss of our land, but we also know it why it was taken. It was for our sins that we were driven from our land.

“When you beget children and children’s children… and you become corrupt and make a graven image….. you will speedily and utterly perish from the land... And you will return to the Lord your G-d with all your heart and all your soul… then the Lord your G-d will bring back your exiles and have mercy … and bring you to the land which your forefathers possessed.”

We hesitate to speak this truth because we are a diaspora people surrounded by nations. Even in Israel we hesitate to speak because we are dependent on the good will of these nations. Yet the Torah tells us that it is precisely in the diaspora, where we ought to seek and find G-d.

“From there you shall seek him out and you shall find him - if you shall seek Him with all your heart and soul. From there, from your exile and diaspora, where G-d is hidden and must be sought in order to be found, you shall seek Him. Don’t despair of finding Him and bringing Him to the attention of the nations. Seek Him with all your heart and soul, and you shall find Him."

Over and over we hear that these arguments are good for the synagogue, but not “out there.” Yet the Torah tells us to seek G-d when we are “out there”: “From there you shall seek him out.”

The mystics point out that the Hebrew word for there issham and the Hebrew word for name is Shem. The two words are similar because they belong together.

On the surface, there, represents a place where G-d needs seeking because He is concealed. "Name" connotes that G-d’s name is known. Yet the two words are comprised of similar letters because it is precisely “out there” that we should seek Him. And when we do, we make a name for Him. Sham, out there, turns out to be a most conducive place for Shem to make His name.

We are wary because on the surface G-d is utterly concealed “out there.” But the Torah enjoins us to have a little faith and make that leap.

Though you are out there, tell your neighbors, colleagues and friends that Israel is yours because G-d gave it to you and because the Bible says it is so. Don’t worry that they will think of you as "way out there.”

G-d told us to think differently. G-d said that your words will make a real difference. You will create a name for G-d and a bastion of support for Israel, even “out there.”

Rabbi Lazer Gurkow, a respected writer, scholar and speaker, is the spiritual leader of Beth Tefilah congregation in London, Ontario. He is the author of Reaching for God: A Jewish Book on Self Help, and his new book, Mission Possible: Living With Higher Purpose will be released this spring and can be pre-ordered by emailing egurkow@gmail.com

Republished with permission - Click HERE to view the original article.

---

May our commitment and connection to the land never be severed! 

MY ISRAEL

CAPTURING ISRAEL'S BEST MOMENTS

Christian Schubert

THREE GENERATIONS OF DEFENDING ISRAEL

Israel and the Promised Land

"On that day the LORD made a covenant with Abram, saying, 'To your descendants I have given this land, from the river of Egypt [brook of Egypt Ð Wadi el-Arish] as far as the great river, the river Euphrates: the Kenite and the Kenizzite and the Kadmonite and the Hittite and the Perizzite and the Rephaim and the Amorite and the Canaanite and the Girgashite and the Jebusite."
NAS - Genesis 15:18-21 

The Greater Promised Land

God was very specific about the land that He promised to Abraham and His descendants through Isaac and Jacob (Israel). This is known as the Greater Promised Land, which extends from the Judean Wilderness to the River Euphrates.

God confirmed these boundaries to Moses after Israel had left Egypt and were on their way to the Promised Land:

"And I will fix your boundary from the Red Sea [Eastern branch Ð Sea of Reeds] to the sea of the Philistines [Gaza along the Mediterranean Sea], and from the [Judean] wilderness to the River Euphrates; for I will deliver the inhabitants of the land into your hand, and you will drive them out before you." - (Joshua 1:4 NAS;)

Unfortunately, the first generation of Israelites that came out of Egypt under Moses did not enter the Promised Land, "because of their unbelief (disobedience)" (Heb. 3:19; 4:6, 11,). However, God raised up a new generation under Joshua and reaffirms the Greater Promised Land that they and their descendents will eventually inhabited:

"From the [Judean] wilderness and this Lebanon, even as far as the great river, the river Euphrates, all the land of the Hittites, and as far as the Great Sea [Mediterranean] toward the setting of the sun, will be your territory" - (Exodus 23:30-31 NAS; see also Deuteronomy 11:24)

The Promised Land of Canaan

Although the Greater Promised Land stretches all the way to the Euphrates River, God limits Israel's initial possession under Joshua and the Judges to the Promised Land of Canaan, which lies within the greater Promised Land given to Abraham in Genesis 15. When God separated the nations (Gen. 10), He identified the land of Canaan as the "land of the Canaanites" which had specific boundaries:

"And the territory of the Canaanite extended from Sidon [Lebanon] as you go toward Gerar [South of Gaza], as far as Gaza; as you go toward Sodom and Gomorrah and Admah and Zeboiim [South of the Dead Sea], as far as Lasha [East of the Dead Sea in Jordon]" - (Genesis 10:19 NAS)

The Land of Canaan

God clearly limits the first wave of Israel's inheritance to the Promised Land of Canaan, which He outlines in detail to Moses:

"Then the LORD spoke to Moses, saying, 'Command the sons of Israel and say to them, "When you enter the land of Canaan, this is the land that shall fall to you as an inheritance, even the land of Canaan according to its borders (Gen. 10:19). Your southern sector shall extend from the wilderness of Zin along the side of Edom, and your southern border shall extend from the end of the Salt Sea eastward. 'Then your border shall turn direction from the south to the ascent of Akrabbim, and continue to Zin, and its termination shall be to the south of Kadesh-barnea; and it shall reach Hazaraddar, and continue to Azmon. And the border shall turn direction from Azmon to the brook [river] of Egypt, and its termination shall be at the sea. 6 'As for the western border, you shall have the Great Sea, that is, its coastline; this shall be your west border. 7 'And this shall be your north border: you shall draw your border line from the Great Sea to Mount Hor. You shall draw a line from Mount Hor to the Lebo-hamath, and the termination of the border shall be at Zedad; and the border shall proceed to Ziphron, and its termination shall be at Hazar-enan. This shall be your north border. For your eastern border you shall also draw a line from Hazar-enan to Shepham, and the border shall go down from Shepham to Riblah on the east side of Ain; and the border shall go down and reach to the slope on the east side of the Sea of Chinnereth. And the border shall go down to the Jordan and its termination shall be at the Salt Sea. This shall be your land according to its borders all around." - (Num 34:1-15 NAS)

The Promised Land of Canaan was portioned out to the twelve tribes of Israel under Joshua after they took possess of it (Josh 13 - 22). As you can see, the boundaries of the twelve tribes fit exactly within the Scriptural boundaries of Canaan (Gen. 10:19).

Distribution of the Promised Land

Taking possession of the Promised Land of Canaan was a picture of entering God's rest, thereby fulfilling the promises that He made to that generation:

"So the LORD gave Israel all the land which He had sworn to give to their fathers [Num. 34], and they possessed it and lived in it. And the LORD gave them rest on every side, according to all that He had sworn to their fathers, and no one of all their enemies stood before them; the LORD gave all their enemies into their hand. Not one of the good promises which the LORD had made to the house of Israel failed; all came to pass." - (Joshua 21:43-45 NAS)

Although God gave Israel the Promised Land of Canaan, their possession of the Greater Promised Land was yet to come through their descendants.

Possessing the Greater Promised Land

It was not until King David and his son Solomon came to power that Israel finally possessed the entire land which God promised Abraham in Genesis 15. David led the way by conquering Israel's enemies from Gaza, to East Jordon, to the River Euphrates:

"Now after this it came about that David defeated the Philistines [Gaza] and subdued them; and David took control of the chief city from the hand of the Philistines. And he defeated Moab [West Jordon], and measured them with the line, making them lie down on the ground; and he measured two lines to put to death and one full line to keep alive. And the Moabites became servants to David, bringing tribute. Then David defeated Hadadezer, the son of Rehob king of Zobah [Northeast Syria], as he went to restore his rule at the River [Euphrates]." - (Joshua 21:43-45 NAS)

Possession of the Greater Promised Land was inherited and maintained by David's son, King Solomon:

"Now Solomon had 4,000 stalls for horses and chariots and 12,000 horsemen, and he stationed them in the chariot cities and with the king in Jerusalem. And he was the ruler over all the kings from the Euphrates River even to the land of the Philistines [Gaza], and as far as the border of Egypt [brook of Egypt]." - (2 Chronicles 9:25-26 NAS, see also 1 Kings 4:21)

Greater Promised Land under David and Solomon

Israel Loses the Promised Land

Unfortunately, King Solomon and the children of Israel did not follow the Lord fully and the kingdom was divided. After centuries of disobedience, the 10 northern tribes of the Kingdom of Israel were conquered by Assyria. Many were taken back to Assyria, but most stayed in the land under Assyrian occupation, where interracial marriages between Israelites and the Assyria's produced children known in the Bible as Samaritans.

Shortly after that, Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon conquered Assyria and took possession of the captives from the ten northern tribes of Israel. Then Nebuchadnezzar conquered Judah and deported most of Judah back to Babylon, where they were reunited with the captives of 10 northern tribes of Israel now under Babylonian control (Ez. 37:15-23).

Shortly after that, Cyrus of Persia conquered the Medes and formed the Medeo-Persian Empire. Then he conquered Babylon and took possession of all the captives from Israel and Judah and decreed that they should "go up" to Jerusalem and rebuild the Temple (2 Chron. 36:22-23; Ezra 1:1-11). His successors, Darius and Artaxerxes, continued his decree until the sons of Israel and their possessions were returned to Jerusalem (Ezra 6:13-22). This is when the sons of Israel from both houses (Israel and Judah) returned as "one man" under the leadership of Zerubbabel (Ezra 3:1-2; 4:12; Neh. 8:1-2), where they were all referred to as both "Jews" and as "Israel" for the first time (Ezra 6:14-16; 7:10-13, 28; 10:5).

Israel Loses the Promised Land a Second Time

Even though God restored both houses as promised, Israel continued in its rebellion to God for another 600 years until all 12 tribes were dispersed among the nations by Titus and the Roman legions in 70 A.D. (James 1:1). This dispersion (Diaspora) was foretold by Moses in Deuteronomy 28, when he prophesied to Israel about the blessings for obedience (vs. 1-14) and the cursings for disobedience (vs. 15-64). Part of the cursings envisioned Israel being scattered among the nations for their disobedience to God:

"Moreover, the LORD will scatter you among all peoples, from one end of the earth to the other end of the earth; and there you shall serve other gods, wood and stone, which you or your fathers have not known. And among those nations you shall find no rest, and there shall be no resting place for the sole of your foot; but there the LORD will give you a trembling heart, failing of eyes, and despair of soul." - (Deuteronomy 28:64-65 NAS )

Their ultimate disobedience was their rejection of Yeshua (Jesus) the Messiah. For this, Yeshua pronounced that the full measure of the cursings would come upon that generation of Jews, who conspired with the Romans to have Him crucified:

"Therefore, behold, I am sending you prophets and wise men and scribes; some of them you will kill and crucify, and some of them you will scourge in your synagogues, and persecute from city to city, that upon you may fall the guilt of all the righteous blood shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah, the son of Berechiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar. Truly I say to you, all these things [cursings] shall come upon this generation." - (Matthew 23:34-36 NAS )

Most assuredly, history has seen the cursings of Deuteronomy 28 poured out on Israel just as Moses and Yeshua (Jesus) prophesied. Yet through all the persecution and attempts to annihilate the Jewish people, God preserved them for the last days when He promises to restore them once again:

"For I will take you from the nations, gather you from all the lands, and bring you into your own land. Then I will sprinkle clean water on you, and you will be clean; I will cleanse you from all your filthiness and from all your idols. Moreover, I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit within you; and I will remove the heart of stone from your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. And I will put My Spirit within you and cause you to walk in My statutes, and you will be careful to observe My ordinances. And you will live in the land that I gave to your forefathers; so you will be My people, and I will be your God." - (Ezekiel 36:24-29 NAS )

Israel Regathered a Second Time

The prophet Isaiah identifies this restoration as a second regathering of Israel back to The Promised Land. He is careful to point out that both houses (Israel and Judah) return together, and that the jealousy which once existed between them is gone. God uses this miracle has a standard (sign) to the nations that His prophetic word never fails:

"Then it will happen on that day that the Lord will again recover the second time with His hand the remnant of His people, who will remain, from Assyria, Egypt, Pathros, Cush, Elam, Shinar, Hamath, and from the islands of the sea. And He will lift up a standard for the nations, and will assemble the banished ones of Israel, and will gather the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth. Then the jealousy of Ephraim will depart, and those who harass Judah will be cut off; Ephraim will not be jealous of Judah, and Judah will not harass Ephraim." - (Isaiah 11:11-13 NAS )

In 1947, with sympathy running high for the Jewish people because of the holocaust, the United Nations passed Resolution 181, which declared the creation of a small Jewish State within the boundaries of the ancient land of Canaan. It was enacted on May 15, 1948, and prophecies that were over 3,000 years old came to pass. Since then, millions of Jews from around the world have returned to the Land of Israel in fulfillment of God's word.

Israel's Full Restoration

Unfortunately, the Arab nations object to Israel's restoration and have tried to destroy them numerous times. However, each time they attack Israel, God's chosen people defeat them and gain back more of the Promised Land. If the Arabs launch any additional attacks against Israel in the future, they will undoubtedly see more of the Promised Land restored to Israel in fulfillment of God's word.

Arab hatred toward the Jews and their conspiracy to destroy them are clearly foreseen by King David, who also points out that Yahweh considers their war against Israel as a war against Him (Ps. 83). Consequently, their end is total defeat and destruction as is any nation who comes against God's restoration of Israel to the Promised Land with Jerusalem as its eternal capital (Ez. 25, 38 and 39; Jer. 49, 50 and 51; Is. 17; Zech. 1 and 12).

For this reason we must bless the people of Israel by supporting God's plan to restore them to their Promised Land (Gen. 12:1-3). We must also pray for the peace of Jerusalem, so that we and our children's children will prosper and be blessed forever (Ps. 122:6). Amen!

The Jewish settlements are legal under international law

A few days ago Australia’s Foreign Minister Julie Bishop released an interview to The Times of Israel suggesting that, contrary to conventional diplomatic wisdom, the settlements may not be illegal under international law. In these last few years a growing number of politicians and scholars have expressed similar positions. Many of them argue that the results of the 1920’s San Remo Conference and more than this the inclusion of the principles contained in the Balfour Declaration in the text of the Mandate of Palestine, assured to the Jewish people the exclusive right to create their “national home” on “the whole country of Palestine, not a mere part of it”.

In this respect, the Levy Report – released on 9 July 2012 by a special committee appointed in late January 2012 by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu – has represented a sort of “watershed”. It clarified that “with the establishment of the United Nations in 1945, the principle of recognizing the validity of existing rights of states acquired under various mandates, including of course the rights of Jews to settle in the Land of Israel by virtue of the above documents, was determined in article 80 of its charter”. According to the Levy Report, Article 80 of the UN Charter implicitly recognizes the Mandate for Palestine.

The late Eugene Rostow, former dean of Yale Law School, also known for being a key draftee of the UN resolution 242, further clarified these aspects explaining that “a trust” – as in Article 80 of the UN Charter – “does not end because the trustee dies”. Rostow’s argument, which is repeated in the Levy report, is that although the League of Nations had ceased to exist, the commitments of the League of Nations remain binding.

These claims are marred by several inaccuracies, starting from the fact that the term “national home” had no mutually agreed upon meaning or scope and that the British government was under no definite obligation, since the Mandate made any Jewish immigration subject to “suitable conditions” and contained safeguards for the rights and position of the non-Jewish communities.

Furthermore, as David Ben-Gurion clarified in July 1947 in front of the UNSCOP commission: “The Mandate, in fact, does not exist because it was violated by the Mandatory. We are not in favour of renewing it. […] we say that the original intention and the need, and what in our conviction is just, should be decided upon by the United Nations […] I said we do not ask for a Mandate any more, so it is not a question. The question does not arise on the Mandate”.

Also the assertion that article 80 of the UN Charter implicitly recognizes the Mandate for Palestine is more complex than often claimed. One of the legal advisors to the Jewish Agency, Jacob Robinson, published a book in 1947 that presented a historical account of the Palestine Question and the UN. He explained that when the Jewish Agency learned that the Allied Powers had discussed at the Yalta Conference (February 1945) a new system of international supervision to supersede the system of mandates, the Agency decided to submit a formal request to the San Francisco Conference (April-June 1945) to obtain a safeguarding clause in the UN Charter. The proposed clause would have prevented a trusteeship agreement from altering the Jewish right to nationhood secured by the Balfour Declaration and the Mandate for Palestine. The UN Conference ignored the Agency’s request and stipulated in article 80 of the Charter that the UN organization did have the necessary power to conclude trusteeship agreements that could alter existing rights held under a mandate.

Robinson tried to portray a legal setback as a victory and make everyone think that Article 80 of the Charter accomplished the Agency’s stated objective. Indeed, the final text adopted by the working paper for international trusteeship contained an exception that allowed trusteeship agreements to do exactly what the Jewish Agency had tried to prohibit. In Article 80’s words: “Except as may be agreed upon in individual trusteeship arrangements placing each territory under the trusteeship system, nothing in this chapter should be construed in and of itself to alter in any manner the rights of any state or any peoples in any territory”.

Article 1 of General Assembly resolution 24(I) reserved the right of the UN to decide not to assume any function or power of the League of Nations. On the 19th March 1948, during the 271st meeting of the Security Council, US Ambassador Warren Austin cited UN General Assembly resolution 24(I) and pointed out: “The United Nations does not automatically fall heir to the responsibilities either of the League of Nations or of the Mandatory Power in respect of the Palestine Mandate. The record seems to us entirely clear that the United Nations did not take over the League of Nations Mandate system”.

On top of all these considerations, the above mentioned thesis of “exclusivity”, besides being unjustified from an historical point of view – Palestine did not belong in an exclusive way to one single population in its entire history – is incorrect also from the legal perspective imposed since the early stage by London. Hubert Young, an important figure of the Foreign Office, wrote in November 1920 that the commitment made by London “in respect of Palestine is the Balfour Declaration constituting it a National Home for the Jewish People”. Lord Curzon corrected him: “No. ‘Establishing a National Home in Palestine for the Jewish people’ – a very different proposition”.

The British White Paper of June 1922 – the first document that officially clarified the interpretation of the Mandate’s text – clarified that the Balfour Declaration does “not contemplate that Palestine as a whole should be converted into a Jewish National Home, but that such a Home should be founded ‘in Palestine’”. Furthermore, it stressed – and this is perhaps the most relevant aspect – that the “Zionist congress” that took place in Carlsbad in September 1921 had officially accepted that “the determination of the Jewish people to live with the Arab people on terms of unity and mutual respect, and together with them to make the common home into a flourishing community, the upbuilding of which may assure to each of its peoples an undisturbed national development”.

It is only in light on these clarifications that the preamble as well as Article 2 of the Mandate text can and should be understood. It is noteworthy that Zionist consent to such interpretation was requested, and received, before the Mandate was confirmed in July 1922. In Weizmann’s words: “It was made clear to us that confirmation of the Mandate would be conditional on our acceptance of the policy as interpreted in the White Paper [of 1922], and my colleagues and I therefore had to accept it, which we did, though not without some qualms”.

The Arabs received 80% of the Jewish Mandate for Palestine. That was the creation of Trans-Jordan for the Arabs east of the Jordan river. They also prohibited any Jewish settlement or habitation in Jordan.

At that same time it was reiterated that everything west of the Jordan river is for the Jewish people. How much more do you want to take away from the Jewish people. I know the Arabs goal is to take over all of Israel and destroy all the Jews just like they expelled over a million Jewish families from the Arab countries and confiscated all their personal assets and Real property of 120,440 sq. km.

Israel’s right to defend itself against fanaticism is something that any person interested in peace cannot but support. Equally true is that the growing attempt to justify the colonization of the Palestinian territories through a problematic interpretation of history, international law, and international consensus is a dangerous threat that requires better public understanding. (e-IR)

With The Legal Foundation and Borders of Israel under International Law

With The Legal Foundation and Borders of Israel under International Law (Mazo Publishers, Jerusalem) Canadian-born Israeli constitutional scholar and lawyer Howard Grief has given us a book that shatters every myth, lie, misrepresentation and distortion employed over the 61 years of Israel’s existence to negate the sovereign rights of the Jewish People to their national home.
It is a lengthy treatise – 660 pages plus a 50-page appendix – but the Jewish people’s long and tortuous struggle to retrieve their stolen patrimony deserves nothing less than full disclosure. Anyone who has ever been at a loss to counter the slanders and calumnies that are the stock in trade of the Israel-bashers and anti-Semites on both the Left and Right will treasure every one of its 20 illuminating chapters.

Rooted in the premise that the best antidote to a myriad of small and medium sized fabrications is the exposure of the whole cloth from which they’ve been woven, The Legal Foundation lays bare two dominant myths that have shaped popular perspectives on Israel. The first is the fallacy that Jewish sovereignty over the land of Israel was the joint product of the 1947 United Nations Partition and the May 15th, 1948 termination of the British Mandate for Palestine.
In fact, as Grief points out, Jewish sovereignty in Palestine had been validated under international law 28 years earlier.
“The legal title of the Jewish People to the mandated territory of Palestine in all of its historical parts,” he informs us, was first recognized on April 24, 1920 when the post-World War I Allied Supreme Council (Britain, France, Italy and Japan), meeting in San Remo, Italy, “converted the 1917 ‘Balfour Declaration’ into a binding legal document.” This was confirmed by the 1920 Treaty of Sevres and Lausanne.
How “binding” may be construed from the fact that its wording gave effect to the provisions of Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations and became incorporated into the Mandate for Palestine.
Indeed, the “San Remo Resolution,” within which the Allied Supreme Council’s decision is contained, constitutes what the author terms “the foundation document of the State of Israel, the legal existence of which is directly traceable from that document.”
That the Jewish People were unable to exercise their sovereignty in Palestine for 28 years – it being assigned to the British Mandatory power as their de facto agent – did in no way detract from their ‘de jure’ rights to the land under international law during that interregnum.
In this thesis, Grief is ironically supported by both a passionate Zionist, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Louis D. Brandeis and one of Zionism’s most implacable opponents, post World War I British Foreign Secretary Lord George Nathaniel Curzon.
Brandeis believed that with the passage of the San Remo Resolution, the debate over who owned Palestine was effectively over. Curzon called the Resolution the “Magna Carta” of the Jewish People.
From the initial mis-attribution of Jewish sovereignty in Palestine to the 1947 Partition Plan rather than the 1920 San Remo Resolution, it was just a hop and a skip to a second major mis-representation of Israel’s international legal status – the erroneous assumption that the Partition Plan and the May 1948 termination of the British Mandate somehow erased the Jewish People’s rights to Palestine in all its historical parts and dimensions enunciated at San Remo, and implemented under the terms of the League of Nations Covenant.
Those “parts and dimensions” were defined inter alia, as including the
northwestern portions of the Golan and most of present day Jordan by the “Franco-British Boundary Convention” in Paris.
The presumptive cancellation of those rights, Grief submits, is thoroughly discredited by “the principle of acquired rights,” codified in the 1969 Vienna Convention on the “Law of Treaties,” and the “doctrine of estoppel.”
The first, he asserts, insures that “the fundamental rights of the Jewish people did not lapse with the international process which brought them into existence. The second further guarantees that these rights cannot simply be abrogated or denied by those states which previously recognized their existence.”
Taken together, they provide what the author terms a “definitive answer anyone who claims that Jewish legal rights and title of sovereignty over all of Palestine and the land of Israel did not continue after the end of the Mandate for Palestine…except in the allotted boundaries of the UN Partition Plan…”
Noteworthy among the states that wholeheartedly endorsed Jewish sovereignty over Palestine in all its “historical parts and dimensions” was the United States of America – the same U.S.A that today regards Israel’s presence in Judea and Samaria as an illegal “occupation” of lands upon which it favors the creation of a Palestinian State.
The Obama administration and the Bush administration that preceded it are either unaware or have chosen to be unaware of the fact that the 1924 Anglo-American Convention on Palestine made the U.S. a “contracting party” to the Mandate, further reinforcing a unanimously passed Joint Resolution of the 67th Congress two years earlier, signed by President Warren G. Harding, recognizing a future Jewish State in “the whole of Palestine.”
It needs to be borne in mind, Grief notes, that the Mandate for Palestine that was ceremoniously incorporated into U.S. law in 1924 “was a constitution for the projected Jewish state that made no provision for an Arab state and which especially prohibited the partition of the country.”
Thus, he concludes, the fierce exception the U.S. has taken to Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria and its unremitting pressure for creation of a “Palestinian State” amount to a repudiation of its signature to the Anglo-American Convention on Palestine. It is in violation of American law and America’s obligations under international law.

Article 80 and the UN Recognition of a “Palestinian State”

SEPTEMBER 22, 2011 10:58 AM 41 COMMENTS

The Signing of the United Nations Charter in 1945.

In the entire debate now taking place on whether the United Nations Security Council or General Assembly has the right to approve the application of the “Palestinian Authority” to be recognized as a new member state of the UN, almost no mention is made of the legal fact that the UN itself is barred by its own Charter from acting upon or approving such an application. The reference here is, of course, to Article 80 of the UN Charter, once known unofficially as the Jewish People’s clause, which preserves intact all the rights granted to Jews under the Mandate for Palestine, even after the Mandate’s expiry on May 14-15, 1948. Under this provision of international law (the Charter is an international treaty), Jewish rights to Palestine and the Land of Israel were not to be altered in any way unless there had been an intervening trusteeship agreement between the states or parties concerned, which would have converted the Mandate into a trusteeship or trust territory. The only period of time such an agreement could have been concluded under Chapter 12 of the UN Charter was during the three-year period from October 24, 1945, the date the Charter entered into force after appropriate ratifications, until May 14-15, 1948, the date the Mandate expired and the State of Israel was proclaimed. Since no agreement of this type was made during this relevant three-year period, in which Jewish rights to all of Palestine may conceivably have been altered had Palestine been converted into a trust territory, those Jewish rights that had existed under the Mandate remained in full force and effect, to which the UN is still committed by Article 80 to uphold, or is prohibited from altering.

As a direct result of Article 80, the UN cannot transfer these rights over any part of Palestine, vested as they are in the Jewish People, to any non-Jewish entity, such as the “Palestinian Authority.” Among the most important of these Jewish rights are those contained in Article 6 of the Mandate which recognized the right of Jews to immigrate freely to the Land of Israel and to establish settlements thereon, rights which are fully protected by Article 80 of the UN Charter.

It should be common knowledge that under the Mandate, all of Palestine was reserved exclusively for the establishment of the Jewish National Home and future independent Jewish State, as was previously decided at the San Remo Peace Conference that took place in April 1920. Or put another way, no part of Palestine was allotted for an Arab National Home or state, since Arab self-determination was being generously granted elsewhere – in Syria, Iraq, Arabia, Egypt and North Africa – which has led to the establishment of the 21 Arab states of today, over a vast land mass from the Persian Gulf to the Atlantic Ocean. There is thus no necessity for a new independent Arab State in the specific area of former Mandated Palestine reserved for Jewish self-determination, most particularly, in Judea, Samaria and Gaza. Creating such a state out of Jewish land would be blatantly illegal under Article 80 of the UN Charter and beyond the legal authority of the UN itself.

In this respect, neither the League of Nations nor its successor, the United Nations, ever had sovereign rights over the land we Jews call Eretz-Israel. As a non-sovereign, the UN has no power whatsoever to allot territory to the “Palestinian Authority” where the allotted territory already belongs to the Jewish People.

Moreover, there is no article in the UN Charter which gives either the Security Council or the General Assembly or even the Trusteeship Council the power to create a new independent state. If the UN had such power, then logically it would also have the inverse power to “de-create” or dismember an existing state, a power it certainly does not enjoy under the UN Charter. If, theoretically speaking, this power did exist, the UN would be in effect a world legislature that could make or unmake states by its own volition, a power that would put in jeopardy the present world order.

For the foregoing reasons, the bill introduced in the US Congress by Ileana Ros-Lehtinen is definitely the proper course of action to follow. UN illegality needs to be roundly condemned and stopped dead in its tracks by an appropriate punitive measure, exactly as Ros-Lehtinen has proposed. Her bill would be even more worthy if it were to include a direct reference to Article 80 and to the fact that the UN has no legal power to create a state or to allot another state’s territory for that purpose, accomplished through the devious or underhanded means of accepting the applicant’s request for membership in the world body.