Comments on: On the utility of illegal outposts http://samsonblinded.org/blog/on-the-utility-of-illegal-outposts.htm A Machiavellian Perspective on the Middle East Conflict Sat, 19 May 2012 18:30:58 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: NormanF http://samsonblinded.org/blog/on-the-utility-of-illegal-outposts.htm/comment-page-1#comment-112373 NormanF Tue, 09 Jun 2009 04:05:09 +0000 http://samsonblinded.org/blog/?p=1055#comment-112373 If Israel annexed Yesha, all the talk of settlement illegality and world demands for a freeze would become redundant. When Israel's government is more afraid of the Arabs than zealous for the Jews, it has a problem. And that is why Israel is on the defensive before the world today. If Israel annexed Yesha, all the talk of settlement illegality and world demands for a freeze would become redundant. When Israel’s government is more afraid of the Arabs than zealous for the Jews, it has a problem. And that is why Israel is on the defensive before the world today.

]]> By: Kashmiri Nomad http://samsonblinded.org/blog/on-the-utility-of-illegal-outposts.htm/comment-page-1#comment-112248 Kashmiri Nomad Sun, 31 May 2009 14:57:53 +0000 http://samsonblinded.org/blog/?p=1055#comment-112248 Samson Blinded on the usefulness of "legal/illegal" West Bank outposts to the Israelis. <a>Islam And The West Accelerated Links [05/31/2009]</a> Samson Blinded on the usefulness of “legal/illegal” West Bank outposts to the Israelis.

Islam And The West Accelerated Links [05/31/2009]

]]> By: Moshe http://samsonblinded.org/blog/on-the-utility-of-illegal-outposts.htm/comment-page-1#comment-112236 Moshe Fri, 29 May 2009 19:16:36 +0000 http://samsonblinded.org/blog/?p=1055#comment-112236 I agree with you, but that particular League of Nations' resolution just simply repeated the text of the Balfour Declaration, which you misquoted. Here it is: _ United Kingdom, Foreign Office, November 2nd, 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 the 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. _ Yours sincerely, (Signed) Arthur James Balfour _ The essential part is “the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people”. The British was smart and wanted the creation of a non-viable Jewish State, that is why they divided the territory later and that is why they still push for more division. The resolution did not call for the establishment of *the*Jewish homeland in Palestine but for the establishment of *a* Jewish State in Palestine. _ Other than that I agree with you. I agree with you, but that particular League of Nations’ resolution just simply repeated the text of the Balfour Declaration, which you misquoted. Here it is:
_

United Kingdom,
Foreign Office, November 2nd, 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 the 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.
_

Yours sincerely,
(Signed) Arthur James Balfour
_

The essential part is “the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people”.
The British was smart and wanted the creation of a non-viable Jewish State, that is why they divided the territory later and that is why they still push for more division.
The resolution did not call for the establishment of *the*Jewish homeland in Palestine but for the establishment of *a* Jewish State in Palestine.
_

Other than that I agree with you.

]]> By: Moshe http://samsonblinded.org/blog/on-the-utility-of-illegal-outposts.htm/comment-page-1#comment-112235 Moshe Fri, 29 May 2009 18:54:02 +0000 http://samsonblinded.org/blog/?p=1055#comment-112235 Try to explain that to Israeli Jews... Even the fartest right wing Jews call Judea and Samaria "occupied territory". . Brainwashing works. For some odd reason the Israeli government did not expel the Arabs during and after the Six Day War and did not include the area into Israel's territory. Instead they brainwashed the entire population to accept the idea of losing more Jewish territory to the enemy. . I'd love to know why? Try to explain that to Israeli Jews… Even the fartest right wing Jews call Judea and Samaria “occupied territory”.
.
Brainwashing works. For some odd reason the Israeli government did not expel the Arabs during and after the Six Day War and did not include the area into Israel’s territory. Instead they brainwashed the entire population to accept the idea of losing more Jewish territory to the enemy.
.
I’d love to know why?

]]> By: Danny the Admin http://samsonblinded.org/blog/on-the-utility-of-illegal-outposts.htm/comment-page-1#comment-112200 Danny the Admin Tue, 26 May 2009 09:25:15 +0000 http://samsonblinded.org/blog/?p=1055#comment-112200 <blockquote>Unfortunately the israeli political establishment stopped short in 1967.</blockquote> Worse, way worse. Moshe Dayan sent Israeli troops to stop the Arabs fleeing to Jordan from Hebron, Tulkarm, and many other places.

Unfortunately the israeli political establishment stopped short in 1967.

Worse, way worse. Moshe Dayan sent Israeli troops to stop the Arabs fleeing to Jordan from Hebron, Tulkarm, and many other places.

]]> By: Eli http://samsonblinded.org/blog/on-the-utility-of-illegal-outposts.htm/comment-page-1#comment-112199 Eli Tue, 26 May 2009 03:09:00 +0000 http://samsonblinded.org/blog/?p=1055#comment-112199 True. Should have destroyed more of them back then, the rest would have fled. But knowing our leaders, we would have probably returned the territory by now, just like the Sinai. True. Should have destroyed more of them back then, the rest would have fled. But knowing our leaders, we would have probably returned the territory by now, just like the Sinai.

]]> By: happyminyan http://samsonblinded.org/blog/on-the-utility-of-illegal-outposts.htm/comment-page-1#comment-112198 happyminyan Tue, 26 May 2009 02:34:50 +0000 http://samsonblinded.org/blog/?p=1055#comment-112198 G-d parcels out land. He is the Landlord, not any UN Charter or League of Nations. G-d parcels out land. He is the Landlord, not any UN Charter or League of Nations.

]]> By: Joe http://samsonblinded.org/blog/on-the-utility-of-illegal-outposts.htm/comment-page-1#comment-112197 Joe Mon, 25 May 2009 21:20:56 +0000 http://samsonblinded.org/blog/?p=1055#comment-112197 Unfortunately the israeli political establishment stopped short in 1967. We should have continued for another week and forced the transfert. The next time it'll much harder. We'll have a final confrontation, and I hope the army will do what they have to, without political strings attached. Ovadiah is correct in saying at no time in history a land was divided between contenders, one side has to prevail over the other. If we cannot de jure than de facto, and we have all the rights to do so. The political courage for the time being is missing. Israel will only act when the knife is on the neck. Unfortunately the israeli political establishment stopped short in 1967. We should have continued for another week and forced the transfert. The next time it’ll much harder. We’ll have a final confrontation, and I hope the army will do what they have to, without political strings attached. Ovadiah is correct in saying at no time in history a land was divided between contenders, one side has to prevail over the other. If we cannot de jure than de facto, and we have all the rights to do so. The political courage for the time being is missing. Israel will only act when the knife is on the neck.

]]> By: Jack Shattuck http://samsonblinded.org/blog/on-the-utility-of-illegal-outposts.htm/comment-page-1#comment-112191 Jack Shattuck Mon, 25 May 2009 16:51:54 +0000 http://samsonblinded.org/blog/?p=1055#comment-112191 "Settlements in the territories are legal in terms of Israeli law and illegal in terms of Palestinian law. Current international law also bans settlements on occupied territories" Since "occupied territory" legally applies to territory previously belonging to another state, of which the PA is NOT and has never been one, under whatever name, Israeli control remains valid under the last international legal ruling - the League of Nations unanimous Mandate for Palestine as the homeland for the Jewish State, continued as valid via Article 80 of the UN Charter. The World Court advisory ruling, for which they lacked jurisdiction under its own rules, could not cite a valid basis for its finding. See <a HREF="http://www.acpr.org.il/ENGLISH-NATIV/02-issue/grief-2.htm" rel="nofollow">Howard Grief's article</A> or <A> Eli Hertz' presentation.</A> (The latter is also available <a HREF="http://www.mythsandfacts.com/Conflict/mandate_for_palestine/ThisLandIsMyLand.ppt#257" rel="nofollow"> as a convenient PowerPoint summary.</A> “Settlements in the territories are legal in terms of Israeli law and illegal in terms of Palestinian law. Current international law also bans settlements on occupied territories”

Since “occupied territory” legally applies to territory previously belonging to another state, of which the PA is NOT and has never been one, under whatever name, Israeli control remains valid under the last international legal ruling – the League of Nations unanimous Mandate for Palestine as the homeland for the Jewish State, continued as valid via Article 80 of the UN Charter. The World Court advisory ruling, for which they lacked jurisdiction under its own rules, could not cite a valid basis for its finding. See Howard Grief’s article or Eli Hertz’ presentation. (The latter is also available as a convenient PowerPoint summary.

]]> By: Danny the Admin http://samsonblinded.org/blog/on-the-utility-of-illegal-outposts.htm/comment-page-1#comment-112190 Danny the Admin Mon, 25 May 2009 16:51:39 +0000 http://samsonblinded.org/blog/?p=1055#comment-112190 Nothing wrong with 'settlers,' though. That's how early Zionists described themselves Nothing wrong with ’settlers,’ though. That’s how early Zionists described themselves

]]>