Tuesday, August 30, 2016

WHERE IS THE REAL APARTHEID IN MIDDLE- EAST?

Thanks for Your Valuable Contribution to Friends of Legal Rights of Israel

Palestinian city refuses to take in palestinian 'refugees'!

Thanks for Your Valuable Contribution to Friends of Legal Rights of Israel

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/217094

RAWABI

Rawabi

Flash 90

The new Arab city of Rawabi being built in Samaria (Shomron) with Israeli approval refuses to allow "Palestinian refugees" from UNRWA camps to relocate to the city.

This, despite past statements to the contrary, and the general impression that the need for a new Arab city was partly because of the suffering of said 'refugees', especially those still living in refugee camps.

So reports investigative journalist David Bedein of Israel Resource News Agency.
"The new Palestinian Arab city of Rawabi," writes Bedein, "has publicized in all stages of its development that it would build schools that would promote peace and reconciliation". He quoted Bashar al-Masri, Rawabi's chief developer, as telling the Guardian for a story on Rawabi, “We are not what they are led to believe, a bunch of terrorists…"

And yet, the town refuses to accept refugees – and why? "Because that would violate the PLO doctrine of the 'inalienable right of return' to homes which they left in Tel Aviv, Jaffa, Be'er Sheva, Tzfat, Ashkelon and more," writes Bedein.

This occurred in 1948 at the establishment of the Jewish State when the Arab leadership promised those fleeing that they would return to their homes once the Jews were slaughtered. When that failed to occur, the Arab world refused to resettle those who fled, purposely maintaining the only instance of multi-generational "refugeeism" in the world while Israel resettled and successfully absorbed an equal number of Jewish refugees from Arab lands during the same period.

The first residents of the city moved in nearly a year ago. The city, mostly large and modern apartment buildings, is planned to house 25,000 people, and up to 40,000 if the city expands in the future. It is located just three kilometers north of the small Jewish town of Ateret, and some 20 kilometers north of Ramallah.

The Jewish Federation in Brazil reportedly donated large amounts for the new city, with the understanding that the Rawabi would be founded upon a peace curriculum that would highlight the need to live in peace with Israel. However, Bedein writes, the president of the Brazilian Jewish Federation was "shocked" to learn that Rawabi will not allow UNRWA camp residents to relocate to Rawabi.

This is all the more shocking in view of the willingness of European countries to allow in hundreds of thousands of Muslim refugees from Syria, even given fears of terrorists among them. In addition, the Palestinian Authority and its supporters perpetually point to the "suffering" of the fourth generation 'refugees' as another reason why Israel must cede Judea and Samaria – while the developers of Rawabi, when the opportunity to alleviate the refugees' plight arises, turn the other way.

Monday, August 29, 2016

PA ARRESTS PALESTINIAN MAYOR FOR WATER-THEFT

http://honestreporting.com/idns-08292016-mayor-arrested/

PA Arrests Mayor Accused of Water Theft

1. The Palestinian Authority arrested the mayor of a West Bank village along with 13 municipal employees suspected of being involved in on-going water theft. Officials from Sa’ir blamed residents for the diversion while also accusing the PA of lowering water pressure.
2. When you have tensions aplenty within Palestinian domestic politics, is it time to call it anintrafada? Thousands of Palestinians demonstrating against the PA turned out for the Nablus funeral of Ahmed Halawa, who died in a Palestinian prison. But here’s why Halawa’s halo’s on hold:

Halawa, a former leader of Fatah’s Aksa Martyrs Brigade and captain in the Palestinian Police, was suspected of being the mastermind behind the killing of two Palestinian Authority security personnel on August 18. After initiating a security operation in Nablus, PA forces arrested Halawa and brought him to the city’s Jneid Prison, where security personnel allegedly beat him to death provoking popular condemnations.

The participants continually attacked PA President Mahmoud Abbas, Nablus Gov. Akram Rjoub and Prime Minister Rami Hamdallah, calling for them to be held accountable.

More on the funeral at Maan News.

3. Why are the United Nations and European Union actively helping the Palestinians build a “war crimes” case against Israel in the International Criminal Court? According to theJerusalem Post:

The plan’s budget includes $100,000 to document crimes against women “by the Israeli occupation,” to be “submitted to the ICC.” Another $150,000 would be spent on “preparing files of complaint” and $129,000 for “developing a monitoring mechanism.”

The plan also called for $202,500 to be set aside to build international coalitions against the “Israeli occupation” for “its noncompliance with international law.”

Israel and the Palestinians

• Israeli Arab Hilal Masharqeh succumbed to his wounds after being stabbed while trying to break up a fight between Jewish youths and his family members in Hadera. Police are investigating.
• With PA municipal elections in less than two months, the Times of Israel visited Hebron to take the pulse of the race between Fatah and Hamas, and what it means for Israel. Meanwhile, Israeli media reports say that leading Fatah officials fearing utter defeat are begging Mahmoud Abbas to cancel the vote.
• Worth watching: CBC reporter Irris Makler takes a literally lights-out perilous ride through the West Bank with Palestinian laborers sneaking into Israel for work.

• Professor Ilan Pappe opened up a can of worms by admitting that the BDS movement wasn’t initiated by grassroots Palestinians, but rather by the radical left. Pappe, of the University of Exeter, is himself a member of the radical left. David Collier, who brought this video to attention, explains why Pappe’s comments are damaging for BDS.

Many people have long surmised that external activists told several groups of Palestinians what they needed. Then civil groups, some only made up of a couple of members, effectively sided with Hamas. They signed on the dotted line and BDS was born. The tail effectively wagging the dog. Whilst this has long been assumed, the evidence did not exist. Now it does . . .

Pappe the activist, who at every single opportunity promotes BDS by suggesting that BDS began as a call from within civil society, now claims that is not true. He also acknowledges that for ‘historical records’, it is important that people believe differently.

This conflict exists because if you remove the ethical underpinning of that boycott, the entire movement collapses. How can a humanitarian organisation side with a boycott that is put together by a few radical extremists and actually hurts the weaker members of civil society?

• Six-year-old Ahmed Dawabsha, who spent a year in a hospital after Jewish terrorists burnt down his family home in the West Bank village of Duma, was taken by his grandfather for a solidarity visit to the demolished home of a Hamas terrorist.
In a November shooting attack, Abed al-Basset al-Haroub, opened fire on people in Gush Etzyon in November, killing 18-year-old American student Ezra Schwartz, Yaakov Don, and Shadi Arafa, an Arab resident of Hebron. Haroub was killed by responding soldiers.

Leaders Ignore International Law - MythsandFacts.com

World Leaders Ignore International Law - Inciting antisemitism and anti-Zionism

Eli E. Hertz

The Jewish People's Right to the Land of Israel

Ban Ki-moon, Condoleezza Rice, and Javier Solana became victims to the 'Occupation' mantra their own organization has repeated over and over in their propaganda campaign to legitimize the Arab position.

The "Road Map" vision, as well as continuous pressure from the "Quartet" (U.S., the European Union, the UN and Russia) to surrender parts of the Land of Israel are contrary to international law that firmly call to "encourage ... close settlement by Jews on the land, including State lands and waste lands not required for public purposes." It also requires "seeing that no Palestine territory shall be ceded or leased to, or in any way placed under the control of the government of any foreign power."

Any attempt to negate the Jewish people's right to Palestine - Eretz-Israel, and to deny them access and control in the area designated for the Jewish people by the League of Nations is a serious infringement of international law.

International Law - The "Mandate for Palestine"

The "Mandate for Palestine" an historical League of Nations document, laid down the Jewish legal right under international law to settle anywhere in western Palestine, the area between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea, an entitlement unaltered in international law. Fifty-one member countries - the entire League of Nations - unanimously declared on July 24, 1922:

"Whereas recognition has been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country."

On June 30, 1922, a joint resolution of both Houses of Congress of the United States unanimously endorsed the "Mandate for Palestine":

"Favoring the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people.

"Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled. That the United States of America favors the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which should prejudice the civil and religious rights of Christian and all other non-Jewish communities in Palestine, and that the holy places and religious buildings and sites in Palestine shall be adequately protected." [italics in the original]

Law of War - Arab Unlawful Acts of Aggression in 1948

Six months before the War of Independence in 1948, Palestinian Arabs launched a series of riots, pillaging, and bloodletting. Then came the invasion of seven Arab armies from neighboring states attempting to prevent the establishment of a Jewish state in accordance with the UN's 1947 recommendation to Partition Palestine, a plan the Arabs rejected.

The Jewish state not only survived, it came into possession of territories - land from which its adversaries launched their first attempt to destroy the newly created State of Israel.

Israel's citizens understood that defeat meant the end of their Jewish state before it could even get off the ground. In the first critical weeks of battle, and against all odds, Israel prevailed on several fronts.

The metaphor of Israel having her back to the sea reflected the image crafted by Arab political and religious leaders' rhetoric and incitement. Already in 1948 several car bombs had killed Jews, and massacres of Jewish civilians underscored Arab determination to wipe out the Jews and their state.

6,000 Israelis died as a result of that war, in a population of 600,000. One percent of the Jewish population was gone. In American terms, the equivalent is 3 million American civilians and soldiers killed over an 18-month period.

Israel's War of Independence in 1948 was considered lawful and in self-defence as may be reflected in UN resolutions naming Israel a "peace loving State" when it applied for membership at the United Nations. Both the Security Council (4 March, 1949, S/RES/69) and the UN General Assembly (11 May, 1949, (A/RES/273 (III)) declared:

"[Security Council] Decides in its judgment that Israel is a peace-loving State and is able and willing to carry out the obligations contained in the Charter ..."

Arab Unlawful Acts of Aggression in 1967

In June 1967, the combined armies of Egypt, Syria, and Jordan attacked Israel with the clear purpose expressed by Egypt's President: "Destruction of Israel." At the end of what is now known as the Six-Day War, Israel, against all odds, was victorious and in possession of the territories of Judea and Samaria [E.H., The West Bank], Sinai and the Golan Heights.

International law makes a clear distinction between defensive wars and wars of aggression. More than half a century after the 1948 War, and more than four decades since the 1967 Six-Day War, it is hard to imagine the dire circumstances Israel faced and the price it paid to fend off its neighbors' attacks.

Who Starts Wars Does Matter

Professor, Judge Stephen M. Schwebel, past President of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) states the following facts:

"The facts of the June 1967 'Six Day War' demonstrate that Israel reacted defensively against the threat and use of force against her by her Arab neighbors. This is indicated by the fact that Israel responded to Egypt's prior closure of the Straits of Tiran, its proclamation of a blockade of the Israeli port of Eilat, and the manifest threat of the UAR's [The state formed by the union of the republics of Egypt and Syria in 1958] use of force inherent in its massing of troops in Sinai, coupled with its ejection of UNEF.

"It is indicated by the fact that, upon Israeli responsive action against the UAR, Jordan initiated hostilities against Israel. It is suggested as well by the fact that, despite the most intense efforts by the Arab States and their supporters, led by the Premier of the Soviet Union, to gain condemnation of Israel as an aggressor by the hospitable organs of the United Nations, those efforts were decisively defeated.

"The conclusion to which these facts lead is that the Israeli conquest of Arab and Arab-held territory was defensive rather than aggressive conquest."

Judge Sir Elihu Lauterpacht wrote in 1968, one year after the 1967 Six-Day War:

"On 5th June, 1967, Jordan deliberately overthrew the Armistice Agreement by attacking the Israeli-held part of Jerusalem. There was no question of this Jordanian action being a reaction to any Israeli attack. It took place notwith¬standing explicit Israeli assurances, conveyed to King Hussein through the U.N. Commander, that if Jordan did not attack Israel, Israel would not attack Jordan.

"Although the charge of aggression is freely made against Israel in relation to the Six-Days War the fact remains that the two attempts made in the General Assembly in June-July 1967 to secure the condemnation of Israel as an aggressor failed. A clear and striking majority of the members of the U.N. voted against the proposition that Israel was an aggressor."

Israel Has the Better Title to the Territory of What Was Palestine, Including the Whole of Jerusalem

International law makes it clear: All of Israel's wars with its Arab neighbors were in self-defence.

**Professor, Judge Schwebel, wrote in What Weight to Conquest:**

"(a) a state [Israel] acting in lawful exercise of its right of self-defense may seize and occupy foreign territory as long as such seizure and occupation are necessary to its self-defense;
"(b) as a condition of its withdrawal from such territory, that State may require the institution of security measures reasonably designed to ensure that that territory shall not again be used to mount a threat or use of force against it of such a nature as to justify exercise of self-defense;
"(c) Where the prior holder of territory had seized that territory unlawfully, the state which subsequently takes that territory in the lawful exercise of self-defense has, against that prior holder, better title.
"... as between Israel, acting defensively in 1948 and 1967, on the one hand, and her Arab neighbors, acting aggressively, in 1948 and 1967, on the other, Israel has the better title in the territory of what was Palestine, including the whole of Jerusalem, than do Jordan and Egypt."

"No legal Right Shall Spring from a Wrong"

Professor Schwebel explains that the principle of "acquisition of territory by war is inadmissible" must be read together with other principles:

"... namely, that no legal right shall spring from a wrong, and the Charter principle that the Members of the United Nations shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State."

Simply stated: Arab illegal aggression against the territorial integrity and political independence of Israel, cannot and should not be rewarded.

Professor Julius Stone, a leading authority on the Law of Nations, stated:

"Territorial Rights Under International Law.... By their [Arab countries] armed attacks against the State of Israel in 1948, 1967, and 1973, and by various acts of belligerency throughout this period, these Arab states flouted their basic obligations as United Nations members to refrain from threat or use of force against Israel's territorial integrity and political independence. These acts were in flagrant violation inter alia of Article 2(4) and paragraphs (1), (2), and (3) of the same article."

Thus, under international law Israel acted lawfully by exercising its right to self-defence when it redeemed and legally reoccupied Judea and Samaria, known also as the West Bank.

Legalities aside, before 1967 there were no Jewish settlements in the West Bank, and for the first ten years of so-called occupation there were almost no Jewish settlers in the West Bank. And still there was no peace with the Palestinians. The notion that Jewish communities pose an obstacle to peace is a red herring designed to blame Israel for lack of progress in the 'Peace Process' and enable Palestinian leadership to continue to reject any form of compromise and reconciliation with Israel as a Jewish state.

http://mythsandfacts.org/article_view.asp?articleID=101&order_id=11

Sunday, August 28, 2016

PALESTINE POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY. POSITIVE SIDE OF ''OCCUPATION''

MOST BEAUTIFUL PLACES IN GAZA

SHARM PARK IN GAZA (JABALYA)

Most Beautiful Places in Gaza | Facebook

This site is about the most beautiful and exciting places in Gaza. If you live in Gaza send me your pictures of fine buildings and shopping malls.

Saturday, August 27, 2016

THE JEWISH LEGAL RIGHT TO THE LAND OF ISRAEL (PALESTINE)

The legal aspects of Jewish rights to a National Home in Palestine ...

PA RESPONSE TO LIEBERMAN´S ''CARROT AND STICKS'' PLAN. ELDER OF ZYON

http://elderofziyon.blogspot.com/2016/08/a-revealing-pa-response-to-lieberman.html

A revealing PA response to Lieberman "carrot and stick" plan

The Jerusalem Post reported last week:

Defense Minister Avigdor Liberman unveiled a new policy toward Palestinians based on the “carrot and stick” model – harsher punishment for families and villages from which terrorists originate and economic benefits for those areas that have not produced terrorists.

“We will implement a differential policy in Judea and Samaria,” Liberman said. “Its purpose is to continue to give benefits to those who desire co-existence with us and make life difficult for those who seek to harm Jews.”

The minister added that “anyone who is prepared for co-existence will prosper, while those who opt for terrorism will lose.”

According to the new policy, the defense establishment divided the West Bank map into two parts – the main part marked on the map in green represented the areas from which no terrorists had come, while a smaller part, mainly in the southern West Bank from Hebron southward featured villages colored in red and yellow.

The areas that will get benefits immediately are Beit Sahur, in which a hospital will be built; western Nablus, in which an industrial zone will be built; and Kafr Bidia, in which a soccer field will be built.

Infrastructure plans will also be expanded in Kalkilya, Hableh and Izbat Tabib, and an economic corridor will be opened from Jericho to Jordan in accordance with a plan being promoted and paid for by the Japanese government.

The means of punishment for areas from where terrorism originates will include increased IDF activity in Area A of the West Bank; home demolitions; increased arrests; raids on homes from which terrorists came; confiscation of terrorism funds and property; cancellation of VIP permits for senior Palestinian Authority officials taking part in incitement; increased vehicle searches at the Kalandiya refugee camp; and stricter enforcement against illegal building.

One of the keys of the plan deals with the defense establishment’s desire to hold talks with Palestinian figures without mediation and without the approval of the Palestinian Authority. Although Liberman did not call it as such, it could be defined as “a track that circumvents Mahmoud Abbas.”

According to Liberman, “[Abbas] speaks with everyone in Israel and, therefore, the goal is to attain symmetry between Israel and the PA.”

He said PA officials speak to all parts of Israeli society – ministers, MKs, mayors, academics and more – whereas Israel holds talks only with PA officials or those who have received the approval of the PA.

“Our goal is to create a dialogue with anyone who wants to talk to us,” the minister stated. He added, however, that “we have no intention to crown kings in the PA or to interfere in internal affairs.”

Israeli politicians slammed the plan from all directions, but the response in the official Wafa news website is even more interesting:

The Palestinian private sector in a press statement Thursday rejected and described as insulting the so called “stick and carrot” policy unveiled by the Israeli Minister of “Defense” Avigdor Liberman.

The statement, issued by the all-inclusive coordinating council of all the business associations, chambers of commerce, and industrial & trade organizations representing the mass of business leaders in Palestine, said: “We view the policy proposed to directly contact Palestinian figures, businessmen and academics and bypass the Palestinian National Authority and its legitimate leadership under elected President Mahmoud Abbas as amateurish, and completely humiliating, under estimating our intellect; and reminds us of old age ideas that are null and void.”

“We as leaders of business and respected figures in our community, representing the private sector in the state of Palestine regard with honor and pride the PLO as the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people and the Palestinian National Authority with the related government agencies as our national government providing us with rule of law, security and enabling environment,” the statement added.

Now, do you think for a moment that the businesspeople drafted this letter on their own? This is an infomercial for Mahmoud Abbas, not a press release from independent businesspeople! The language leaves little doubt that it was drafted and written entirely by Mahmoud Abbas' loyalists and given to these groups to sign, probably with an implicit threat attached. Businesspeople aren't in the habit of spontaneously praising their government this way, and the additional language of "providing us with the rule of law, security and enabling environment" sounds more sarcastic than sincere.

This proves what we reported recently - Palestinians agree that there is no free speech in the territories. This letter proves it.

It also proves that Abbas is running a dictatorship where he does not allow the possibility of any messaging that is not pre-approved by him. Which is yet another reason to take any statements given to the media from institutions in the PA with a huge grain of salt.

Palestinians know the rules, but Western consumers of news are clueless about them.