Here is some information that you need to know about the Arab/Palestinians.

Here is some information that you need to know about the Arab/Palestinians.
There never has been, there is not now and there never will be a country called "Palestine."
The Arab/Palestinians/Moslems squatting on Jewish land in and around Israel are overwhelmingly either descendants of invaders, illegal immigrants or trespassers.
The term "Palestinian" was popularized after the Six Day War in '67 in an attempt to delegitimize Israel. 
There are already 21 Arab/Moslem dominated countries spread out over a few millions square miles of territory, including most of Jordan which was part of the Jewish allocated land under the League of Nations in 1922. It also stated that the Jewish people are to set up their own government and none other. The Arabs also ejected close to a million Jewish people from their countries and confiscated their homes and assets, about a third of the Jewish people died while leaving the Arab countries.
The Arab/Moslems are not interested in creating a 22nd Arab controlled country.
Their only desire is to annihilate the one and only Jewish state.

 "And We said thereafter to the Children of Israel "Dwell securely in the land (of ... (Holy Quran 17:104).

(Surah Al-Ma’ida, verse 21), and the other (Surah Al-Shara’a, verse 59) says that the land was bequeathed to the Jews.

Under International Law and Treaties – An Arab/Palestinian State cannot be established in Israel on Jewish land allocated to the Jewish people under the San Remo agreement of 1922 and ratified by the League of Nations and signed by 51 member states.

 

Jordan is the Palestinian State - The land originally allocated to the Jewish people,

The British violated the agreement and gave it to the Arabs.

YJ Draiman

Any Israeli government official who speaks against the policy of Israel and commits treasonous acts against Israel should be expelled from office and jailed. It is time for the Israeli's and its government to curb treasonous acts by its officials. This is sedition which is a crime.
YJ Draiman

HOW TO HANDLE ARAB VIOLENCE IN ISRAEL

Israel should inform the Arabs that any disturbances or attacks will be dealt with ejection of those people and the area will be off limits to the Arabs.
This is Israel the Jewish home and any threats or violent actions against the Jewish people or visitors will be dealt with the most extreme action by the Israeli authorities,
The Jewish people have the right to live in peace and harmony without threats or fear of violence.

It is insanity to try and make peace with people who are telling everyone that they want to kill all the Jews and have no respect for human life.
YJ Draiman

Under International Law – An Arab/Palestinian State cannot be established in Israel on Jewish land allocated to the Jewish people under the San Remo agreement of 1922 and ratified by the League of Nations and signed by 51 member states.

The San Remo agreement of 1922 states that only the Jewish people can set-up its own government.
In violation of the of the agreement the British allocated over 70% of the Jewish land to Trans-Jordan.
Now you want to allocate more Jewish land to the Arab/Palestinians, again in violation of the agreement. This would create two Arab countries and one Jewish country greatly reduced in its original land allocation. This is in violation of International law and the San Remo agreement which was adapted by the League of Nations and signed by 51 member countries. Under the law we must address the ejection of close to a million Jews from Arab countries and the property and assets that were confiscated.
In addition about a third of those Jews died during those Arab pogroms against its Jewish population.

YJ Draiman

Under International Law – An Arab/Palestinian State cannot be established in Israel

The Exclusive Political Rights Granted To Jews In 1920 At San Remo

San Remo Agreement of 1920 that established the British Mandate for Palestine. It granted the Jews exclusive collective political rights to Palestine, in trust, to vest when the Jews had attained a population majority.

The San Remo agreement of 1922 states that only the Jewish people can set-up its own government.
In violation of the of the agreement the British allocated over 77% of the Jewish land to Trans-Jordan.
Now you want to allocate more Jewish land to the Arab/Palestinians, again in violation of the agreement. This would create two Arab countries and one Jewish country greatly reduced in its original land allocation. This is in violation of International law and the San Remo agreement which was adapted by the League of Nations and signed by 51 member countries.
Under the law we must address the ejection of close to a million Jews from Arab countries and the property and assets that were confiscated. In addition about a third of those Jews died during those Arab pogroms against its Jewish population.
YJ Draiman

It is time for the Jewish people to fight anti-Semitism in a coordinated effort worldwide.
It is also a time to respond to all the negative and false publicity about Israel and educate the world on the true intentions of the Arab-Palestinians and the Moslem world. We must develop a major PR worldwide to respond to such false publicity.
YJ Draiman

Balfour declaration

After WWI the Allied powers set-up the British Mandate. The League of Nations (and later, the UN) has given the British a mandate for Palestine after they took control from the Ottoman Empire. In 1948 Jordan occupied part of the territory nowadays called “West Bank”, otherwise known as Judea and Samaria, and Egypt occupied Gaza, areas that were re-taken by Israel in 1967. Jordan annexed the West Bank (a move unrecognized by anyone except UK and Pakistan) and has renounced the annexation since. These areas are therefore “orphans” in terms of statehood, and this should be included in the discussion of the legality of Israeli’s living in Judea and Samaria. We must also review the 1920 San Remo Agreement and its implications on the exclusive political rights of the Jews and the allocation of the land to the Jewish people which includes Trans-Jordan. It also stated that Jews can live anywhere within the Mandate of Palestine and it also incorporated the Balfour Declaration.

Preventing Jewish settlements in Judea and Samaria is a violation of international law and League of Nations

The “Mandate” Defined Where Jews Are and Are Not Permitted to Settle

The “Mandate for Palestine” document did not set final borders. It left this for the Mandatory to stipulate in a binding appendix to the final document in the form of a memorandum. However, Article 6 of the “Mandate” clearly states:

“The Administration of Palestine, while ensuring that the rights and position of other sections of the population are not prejudiced, shall facilitate Jewish immigration under suitable conditions and shall encourage, in co-operation with the Jewish agency referred to in Article 4, close settlement by Jews on the land, including State lands and waste lands not required for public purposes.”

"It should be remembered that in 1918, with the fall of the Ottoman Empire, Britain and France were handed more than 5,000,000 square miles to divvy up and 99% was given to the Arabs to create countries that did not exist previously. Less than 1% was given as a Mandate for the re-establishment of a state for the Jews on both banks of the Jordan River. In 1921, to appease the Arabs once again, another three quarters of that less than 1% was given to a fictitious state called Trans-Jordan."   (Jack Berger, May 31, 2004.)

The total for all the 22 Arab League countries is 6,145,389 square miles (SM). By comparison, all 50 states of the United States have a total of 3,787,318 SM. Israel has 8,463 SM, about one-sixth of that of the State of Michigan. Iran, Turkey,

Pakistan and Afghanistan are Muslim but not Arab and are not included.
     World Arab population: 300 million; World Jewish population: 13.6 million; Israel's Jewish population: 5.4 million.  (Dr. Wilbert Simkovitz, http://dehai.org/archives/dehai_news_archive/apr04/0223.html)

"... during the late 1940s, more than 40 million refuges around the world were resettled, except for one people. They [Palestinian arabs] remain defined as refugees, wallowing 60 years later in 59 UNRWA refugee camps, financed by $400 million contributed annually by nations of the world to nurture the promise of the "right of return" to Arab neighborhoods and Arab villages from 1948 that no longer exist."  (Noam Bedein, Jerusalem Post, January 6, 2009.)

Some 900,000 Jews left behind $400 billion in assets when they were forced to flee for their lives from the Arab countries in the 1940s. They hold deeds for five times Israel's size.  (Independent Media Centre, Winnipeg)

Re Israel's irrevocable ownership of Israel, Golan, Samaria, Judea and Gaza: "Nothing that Israel's legal system says can change the facts that: (1) the legal binding document is the Mandate of the League of Nations and (2) the obligations of the Mandate are valid in perpetuity."  (Professor Julius Stone)

"By 1920 the Ottoman Empire had exercised undisputed sovereignty over Palestine for 400 years. In Article 95 of the treaty of Sevres, that sovereignty was transferred to England in trust for a national homeland for the jews. The local Arabs had never exercised sovereignty over Palestine and so they lost nothing. Their rights were fully protected by a provisio in the grant: '...it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine...' The proviso has been fully observed by the Israelis. Since 1950 the Arabs have built some 261 new settlements in Judea and Samaria — more than twice as many as the Jews, but you never hear of them. They fill them with Arabs from Lebanon, Egypt and Jordan and by the grace of God they become Palestinians. Allahu Akbar! The Arabs call Judea "the West Bank' because they would look silly claiming that Jews are illegally living in Judea."  (Comment by Wallace Brand on Martin Peretz "Narrative Dissonance" The New Republic, July 1, 2009)

"More Americans need to become familiar with the concept of baseline budgeting. In simple terms, if an agency's budget is $100, and they are expecting an increase of $10.00 next year, but they only get $8.00, politicians characterize that as a $2.00 cut in spending. Concerning the entire $1.2 trillion in 'cuts' engendered by the sequester, it must be understood that they are not really cuts at all. They are really a lowering of the projected increase in federal spending going forward. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) cuts through the fog. 'For the 2014-2023 period, deficits in CBO's baseline projections total $7.0 trillion. With such deficits, federal debt would remain above 73 percent of GDP —far higher than the 39 percent average seen over the past four decades,' it reports. Thus, over the next decade, we are 'cutting' our way to adding another $7 trillion of debt to the $16-plus trillion we have already amassed. As far as the administration, Democrats and their media enablers are concerned, any attempt to mitigate that 'paying-for problem' will turn America into a Third World nation of vegetable eaters. Yet the simple truth remains inarguable: absent the genuine entitlement reform critically necessary to get our spending under control, we are headed for national bankruptcy. At that point, even vegetables may be a luxury item. [..] over the next decade, we are 'cutting' our way to adding another $7 trillion of debt to the $16-plus trillion we have already amassed.' (Arnold Ahlert, February 19, 2013)

"It should be remembered that in 1918, with the fall of the Ottoman Empire, Britain and France were handed more than 5,000,000 square miles to divvy up and 99% was given to the Arabs to create countries that did not exist previously. Less than 1% was given as a Mandate for the re-establishment of a state for the Jews on both banks of the Jordan River. In 1921, to appease the Arabs once again, another three quarters of that less than 1% was given to a fictitious state called Trans-Jordan."   (Jack Berger, May 31, 2004.)

The total for all the 22 Arab League countries is 6,145,389 square miles (SM). By comparison, all 50 states of the United States have a total of 3,787,318 SM. Israel has 8,463 SM, about one-sixth of that of the State of Michigan. Iran, Turkey, Pakistan and Afghanistan are Muslim but not Arab and are not included.      World Arab population: 300 million; World Jewish population: 13.6 million; Israel's Jewish population: 5.4 million.  (Dr. Wilbert Simkovitz, http://dehai.org/archives/dehai_news_archive/apr04/0223.html)

"... during the late 1940s, more than 40 million refuges around the world were resettled, except for one people. They [Palestinian arabs] remain defined as refugees, wallowing 60 years later in 59 UNRWA refugee camps, financed by $400 million contributed annually by nations of the world to nurture the promise of the "right of return" to Arab neighborhoods and Arab villages from 1948 that no longer exist."  (Noam Bedein, Jerusalem Post, January 6, 2009.)

Some 900,000 Jews left behind $300 billion in assets when they were forced to flee for their lives from the Arab countries in the 1940s. They hold deeds for five times Israel's size.  (Independent Media Centre, Winnipeg)

Re Israel's irrevocable ownership of Israel, Golan, Samaria, Judea and Gaza: "Nothing that Israel's legal system says can change the facts that: (1) the legal binding document is the Mandate of the League of Nations and (2) the obligations of the Mandate are valid in perpetuity."  (Professor Julius Stone)

"By 1920 the Ottoman Empire had exercised undisputed sovereignty over Palestine for 400 years. In Article 95 of the treaty of Sevres, that sovereignty was transferred to England in trust for a national homeland for the jews. The local Arabs had never exercised sovereignty over Palestine and so they lost nothing. Their rights were fully protected by a provisio in the grant: '...it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine...' The proviso has been fully observed by the Israelis. Since 1950 the Arabs have built some 261 new settlements in Judea and Samaria — more than twice as many as the Jews, but you never hear of them. They fill them with Arabs from Lebanon, Egypt and Jordan and by the grace of God they become Palestinians. Allahu Akbar! The Arabs call Judea "the West Bank' because they would look silly claiming that Jews are illegally living in Judea."  (Comment by Wallace Brand on Martin Peretz "Narrative Dissonance" The New Republic, July 1, 2009)

"More Americans need to become familiar with the concept of baseline budgeting. In simple terms, if an agency's budget is $100, and they are expecting an increase of $10.00 next year, but they only get $8.00, politicians characterize that as a $2.00 cut in spending. Concerning the entire $1.2 trillion in 'cuts' engendered by the sequester, it must be understood that they are not really cuts at all. They are really a lowering of the projected increase in federal spending going forward. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) cuts through the fog. 'For the 2014-2023 period, deficits in CBO's baseline projections total $7.0 trillion. With such deficits, federal debt would remain above 73 percent of GDP —far higher than the 39 percent average seen over the past four decades,' it reports. Thus, over the next decade, we are 'cutting' our way to adding another $7 trillion of debt to the $16-plus trillion we have already amassed. As far as the administration, Democrats and their media enablers are concerned, any attempt to mitigate that 'paying-for problem' will turn America into a Third World nation of vegetable eaters. Yet the simple truth remains inarguable: absent the genuine entitlement reform critically necessary to get our spending under control, we are headed for national bankruptcy. At that point, even vegetables may be a luxury item. [..] over the next decade, we are 'cutting' our way to adding another $7 trillion of debt to the $16-plus trillion we have already amassed.' (Arnold Ahlert, February 19, 2013)

Read More Quotes Here

An American joint resolution of both Houses of Congress signed by a U.S. president and an international convention signed by the UK and by another U.S. president stemming out of the decisions of a 91 year-old conference in San-Remo, Italy, now relegated to the dustbin of history.
The decisions emanating from that conference are worthy of re-examination and scrutiny.
The Middle East faced a unique and very rare situation in the aftermath of World War I. The defeated Ottoman Empire, following centuries of rule, was forced to surrender its sovereignty over the entire region, except for Turkey.
On April 19, 1920, the victorious Allied Powers convened in San-Remo to determine the fate of territories Turkey had surrendered.  The newly created League of Nations submitted a document to the conference,  “The Mandate on Palestine,” which was adopted with minor modifications.
The third paragraph of this document’s preamble read: “Whereas recognition has thereby been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country;”
The document protected the civil rights of all but granted no recognition of Arabs’ political rights; its primary objective was to grant political rights exclusively to the Jews.
Political right to self-determination as a polity for Arabs had already been guaranteed by the same League of Nations in four other mandates – in Lebanon and Syria [The French Mandate], Iraq, and later Trans-Jordan [The British Mandate].
On the second day of the San Remo conference the Arabs launched their first violent murderous attack on the Jews. They have stuck to this tactic until today and Obama’s speech has rewarded them.
However, despite the violence, the League of Nations unanimously adopted the document on July 24, 1922, with all 51 member nations voting in favor. It now constitutes international law. 
On June 30, 1922, a joint resolution of both Houses of Congress unanimously endorsed the “Mandate for Palestine,” confirming the irrevocable right of Jews to settle in the area of Palestine – anywhere between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea (U.S. Resolution 322 – Lodge-Fish joint resolution). President Warren G. Harding signed the joint resolution on September 21, 1922.
A convention between the United States and Great Britain in respect to British rights in Palestine was signed by U.S. President Calvin Coolidge on March 2, 1925, after being ratified by the U.S. Senate on February 20, 1925. The convention’s text incorporated the “Mandate for Palestine” text, including the preamble. By doing so, the U.S. and the British governments recognized and confirmed the irrevocable right of Jews to settle in the area of Palestine – anywhere between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea as is spelled out in the Mandate document.
Therefore, the partition of Palestine to Jordan and Palestine (from the Mediterranean to the Jordan River), unilaterally granted by the British in 1946, was illegal. This act gave 77% of the territory allocated for the Jews by the international community, including Britain itself, to the Arabs.
With the League of Nations’ dissolution in 1946 and subsequent establishment of the United Nations, this new body was empowered by –and confined to – its Charter.
In Article 80 of the U.N. Charter, the UN practically adopted all League of Nations’ decisions concerning Mandates it created. It prohibited any modification of decisions taken by the League of Nations pertaining to territories under Mandate regime except by unanimous consent of all parties involved.
Therefore, Resolution 181, which was adopted on November 29, 1947 in the General Assembly, a non-binding recommendation to partition Palestine, whose implementation hinged on acceptance by both parties, Arabs and Jews, contradicted article 80 of the U.N. Charter because the Arab nations, including Egypt, Syria, Iraq, and Saudi Arabia denounced the plan on the General Assembly floor and voted as a bloc against it promising to defy its implementation by force.
Moreover, recognition of a Palestinian state by the General Assembly of the U.N. is not valid.
Furthermore, sovereignty can be recognized to countries, not organizations. No sovereign state today has any claim to any territory in the western part of Palestine, not even to Judea, Samaria or the Gaza strip. No sovereign state except Israel has the right to sovereignty in this territory, as previously explained.  Neither the U.N. nor anybody else has legal right to deprive the Jewish people of its legal rights to sovereignty over the whole of the western part of Palestine.
If the U.N. and other nations go along with the Palestinian Initiative they will be acting in contradiction to the international law and to the U.N. Charter. Therefore, such an act shall be overridden by the League of Nations’ decision legally and unanimously voted for on July 24, 1922.
The Arabs have defied the implementation of the international community’s decision to grant Palestine to the Jewish people. They have done so by provoking violence since 1920.
It is incumbent upon the international community to bring into renewed focus the prescient vision of the San-Remo Conference and prevent intractable, hostile enemies from plunging the State of Israel and its environs into irreversible anarchy.

THE JEWISH SETTLEMENT ILLEGALITY LIE

EXPOSED

By

Wallace Edward Brand

This paper explains why people think that the Jewish

settlements in Judea and Samaria are illegal and why

they really aren’t.

Following WWII a large number of small territories

became decolonized and became states. This added

a large number of very small states to the UN. With

one state, one vote, (no matter what the size of the

state) these additions permitted the Afro-Asian and

Soviet blocs to dominate the vote in the UN General

Assembly. But the UNGA only recommended – it was

not intended to be a world legislature. If all parties in

dispute agreed, they could sign a treaty. That would

be International Law.

Russia had turned against Israel because it saw Israel

as a barrier to its domination of the oil of the Middle

East, and, as a consequence to hegemony over

Western Europe. It tried to exploit the Arab hatred of

the Balfour Declaration, the Palestine Mandate and

the existence of Israel. It was able to enact in the UN

Electronic copy available at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2404738

a resolution promoting the "inalienable rights of the

Palestinian People" without any examination of

whether there was a Palestinian People or what their

rights were and then was able to form a UN

"Committee for the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights

of the Palestinian People’.

The committee commenced writing a report entitled

Origin and Evolution of the Palestine Problem relying

on work of an Arab Lawyer named Henry Cattan who

had been a member of the Arab Higher Committee.

That committee had been led by Haj Amin al Husseini

the grand mufti of Jerusalem. Husseini had been a

friend of Adolph Hitler. He told the Germans that if

they wanted to reward him for his help, they could,

when they prevailed in WW2, give him permission to

liquidate all the Jews in Palestine.

Cattan had also represented the Arabs in the 1947

UNSCOP hearings. His work, and that of his friend

W.T. Mallison was relied on in the first part of Origin

and Evolution etc. covering 1917 to 1947. In 1979 his

friend Mallison, who had written the foreword of

Cattan's book "The Palestine Problem", at the request

of the UN Committee, wrote a legal opinion based on

the Major Resolutions of the UN General Assembly. It

concluded that the Jews were, under international

law, engaged in illegal occupation of Judea, Samaria,

East Jerusalem and Gaza. However their opinion

was not based on genuine International Law as the

Resolutions of the General Assembly are mere

recommendations. They can only become

International Law if the recommendations are

accepted by all parties and all parties sign a treaty

incorporating the recommendations. This wasn't done

with the Partition Resolution. Nonetheless, Mallison's

opinion was published in pamphlet form by the

Committee and it received wide publicity.

An Australian lawyer named Julius Stone, widely

acclaimed as an authority on international law, was so

outraged by the gross distortion of international law

that he published a criticism of it entitled: Israel

Palestine: Assault on the Law of Nations. He showed

that the Resolutions the opinion were based on were

not International Law but mere recommendations that

died at birth when the Partition Resolution, No. 181 of

1947 died at birth because it was rejected by the

Arabs. Stone also showed that it was pretty far

fetched to believe that any group claiming to be a

people could empower the UN to redraw the

boundaries of a sovereign state. He showed that the

Jewish People already had sovereignty based on the

San Remo Resolution and the Palestine Mandate.

Long before the time the natural law on the selfdetermination

of a people had been adopted as

international law, the British Policy to recognize

Jewish political self-determination in Palestine had

evolved into international law. It became law first at

San Remo, and then as the Palestine Mandate, a

treaty approved by 53 states. That was to give the

Jews initially an equitable interest in the political rights

to Palestine. It gave them the right to close

settlement on the land, but placed the rights in trust

until the Jews were able to muster a majority, by

immigration from the diaspora. When the Jews were

in the majority, and could carry out the obligations of

sovereignty, the political rights, carrying with them the

right of establishing a Jewish Government, would vest

in World Jewry. You can find the details of all of this in

an opinion I have prepared entitled Claims of the

Jewish and Arab People to the Right of Self-

Determination in Palestine.

Archived

SSRN.com/abstract=2385304

First, treaties, and second, long standing practices

accepted by most states are the stuff of International

Law. Mallison tried to cram into the second category

the partition of Palestine even though states barely

approved the Partition Resolution with the aid of the

Russian bloc and soon thereafter Russia had turned

against the Partition. After WW2 the rights of a people

to self-determination that had been only natural law,

became adopted as international law in the 1970s.

However in each instance, the lawyers inserted in this

legislation the legal code words “sovereign equality”

that meant that the territorial integrity of each

sovereign state must be preserved. That caution was

ignored in Mallison’s opinion coming out of the UN

Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights

of the Palestinian People. So when the Palestinian

People assert their inalienable rights to selfdetermination,

they will find doing so will interfere with

the rights of territorial integrity of a preexisting state,

the Jewish People’s state and that right is paramount.

Russia also pushed the view that Jewish settlements

were outlawed by the 4th Geneva Convention that

prohibited states from deporting or transferring

people. But it wanted to apply this theory to people

who weren’t being transferred – they had decided

themselves they wanted to move and it would violate

their human rights to prevent them. And in any event

the land designated to be kept clear was land under a

“belligerent occupation” that had had a legitimate

sovereign, not just any land under a Military

Occupation. And the land had been liberated by

Israel in 1967 in a defensive war was from an illegal

occupier, Jordan, who had gained it in an aggressive

war in 1948. Israel’s occupation was not a “belligerent

occupation”. In 1967 it still owned the political rights

to all Palestine west of the Jordan. Jordan was not a

legitimate sovereign over territories on the west bank

of the Jordan River and was not recognized as such

even by the members of the Arab League.

Russia is now cooking on the front burners and will

likely come up with still another reason that the land

belongs to the Arabs or anyone but the Jews. Just

look at the stories they are cooking up in the Ukraine.