Creeping Arab annexation in Jerusalem
Aaron Klein of WORLD NET DAILY reported on sections of Jerusalem that are ‘de facto’ annexed by Arab Muslims/PLO and, therefore, banned to Jews. Even the Police are afraid to go into those areas.
Here we are reminded of such areas in France where Muslims in “critical mass” have made it dangerous for French Police to enter.
These areas in many parts of Europe have been ‘de facto’ annexed by Arab Muslims who have been migrating in and annexing by sheer force of numbers – yet demanding social welfare from that host nation.
Under the guidance of Jewish Leftists in a number of governments, Israel has allowed creeping annexation of its diminished territory. One can quickly think of Yitzhak Rabin, Shimon Peres and Yossi Beilin in their Oslo abandonment, followed by Oslo 2, Hebron Protocol, Wye River, Sharm el-Sheikh Memo, ‘et al’ – where such cities as Shechem (Nablus), Ram’Allah, Jenin, Bethlehem, Jericho, Tulkarem, Gaza and 80% of Hebron were gifted to the Muslim Arab PLO under Yassir Arafat for an unlikely and unrealized “peace” which only turned into dangerous enclaves for Palestinian Muslim Arab Terrorists.
We watched in unrelenting horror as Sharon and Olmert abandoned the 21 communities in Gush Katif/Gaza and 4 in Northern Samaria, uprooting 10,000 Jewish men, women and children, destroying their homes, farms, schools, factories, businesses and even their cemeteries. After they were evicted, the Arab Muslim Palestinians destroyed their synagogues and the greenhouses which were left for them to work in.
This did not bring peace but created a firing base for Hamas to overthrow their Fatah brothers and launch 10,000 Rockets, Missiles and Mortars at the civilians in Southern Israel for the last 8 years.
This disengagement from Gush Katif/Gaza was another useless gesture of Jewish Land for peace from the Arab Muslims – which did not occur. Even the radical Leftist Shimon Peres recently admitted that the evacuation from Gush Katif/Gaza was a mistake.
This was another useless gesture pushed by then President George W. Bush and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice as well as the Arabists in the State Department. Like Oslo, the Gush Katif/Northern Samaria abandonment, turned into a gesture of national suicide as Hamas Palestinian Terrorists commenced their promised attack to destroy the Jewish people and the Jewish State. They were intent on driving Israel out of Sderot, Ashkelon and all areas into which their munitions could reach. Here again, the Leftists of Kadima – including Olmert, Barak, Livni and the whole Kadima Cabinet were compliant in creeping annexation as they refused to defend Southern Israel from eight years of assaults by Gazan Muslim Arab Palestinians.
I always thought of the Left as knowing conspirators with the aspirations of the Palestinians from Arafat through to Hezb’Allah, Hamas, and Fatah all as proxies of Iran and Syria.
Those of the Leftists so-called Jewish governments were hand-maidens and enablers to the Muslim Jihadists who murdered and maimed so many Jews. As these Jewish leaders experimented with the lives of the Jewish citizens of Israel so too do they deserve the same pain and punishment they have inflicted on the people. Life in prison would be too little for what they have done and are still doing while they grasp the last dregs of their power before the government changes.
These soul-less leaders in the nations who are clearly in a war with G-d as are the leaders in the nations who betray Israel to Ishmaelites. Creeping annexation of Jerusalem by the Muslims is merely one element in their war with G-d who gifted the Land of Israel to the Jewish people in perpetuity.
Even America, who once seemed the assigned protector of Israel and the Jewish people has failed its mission and brought the familiar curse upon itself. As said in the Bible: “I will bless those who bless thee and curse those who curse thee.” The American people are not the same as their cursed leaders but, they all will have to pay for the evil their leaders brought upon America by their bonding with the Muslim “Jihadists” (Holy warriors for Islam) who have sworn to kill all the “infidels” (non-Muslims).
Here we find the likes of Jimmy Carter, George Herbert Walker Bush, the Clintons, George W. Bush and his venomous Condoleezza Rice. Now we have Barack Obama and another venomous Secretary of State Hillary Clinton – out of Obama’s garden of anti-Israel creatures. As each of these American so-called leaders planned assault after assault against the Jewish State, America was punished. Why must the good people of America suffer what their perfidious leaders have done against Israel in deference to a people dedicated to the death blood cult of a pagan desert tribe religion?
Perhaps Americans have been cursed by a destroyed economy and more because we, the people did not drive these perfidious leaders from high office. Regrettably, the same goes for the Jews of Israel who allowed their leaders to give away their birthright, the Land deeded to the Jewish people forever and, instead, allowed them to desecrate G-d’s Covenant with the Jewish people.
As America and the Nations of the world have brought upon themselves a terrible curse, so too have the Leftist Jews of Israel brought into the Land a curse of nations wishing to destroy G-d’s nation.
So – You don’t really believe all this stuff about G-d cursing the nations. Most Jews and Christians also don’t believe – except for those times when they are sinking on their own Titanic.
I wonder if the rabble who were about to drown as Noah’s Ark floated away suddenly had a moment of illumination? I wonder if the trash of Sodom and Gomorrah had their moment of illumination as the fire and brimstone rained down on them? I wonder if the Americans and Europeans will have their moment of clarity as their nations spiral down to worthless money, drought, inner city riots for food, rampant incurable afflictions such as HIV or the super bacteria immune to our best anti-biotics (MSRA: Methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus)? Will we know that humanity failed G-d’s litmus test as they attack his messengers simply because they are Jews who brought the one G-d and His Laws into view?
Strange how all this has been forecast but, even as it is happening, we cannot believe that it is our fault and we set retribution in motion.
The Illegal Annexation of East Jerusalem As reported by the guardian.co.uk on March 7, 2009“A confidential EU report accuses the Israeli government using settlement expansion … ‘actively pursuing the illegal annexation’ of East Jerusalem.”
by Eli E. Hertz http://www.mythsandfacts.org/ March 8, 2009 Palestinian Arabs, supported by the EU and the U.S. have nurtured a myth that historically there were two Jerusalems – an Arab ‘East Jerusalem’ and a Jewish ‘West Jerusalem.’ This brief will attempt to reveal the ignorance of those who claim they are the keepers of international law.
Significant Authorities in International Law
The outcome of consistent Arab aggression was best described by Professor, Judge Stephen M. Schwebel, a former President of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague:
“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 better title in the territory of what was Palestine, including the whole of Jerusalem.” [bold/underline by author]
In conclusion of the events and the role international law may play in determining the future of Jerusalem, one should quote Judge Lauterpacht, a former judge ad hoc on the bench of the International Court of Justice:
“Israel’s governmental measures in relation to Jerusalem – both New and Old – are lawful and valid.”
Arthur Goldberg, the former U.S. Ambassador to the UN (in 1967) who helped draft UN Security Council Resolution 242, testified in regard to the omission of Jerusalem from the resolution:
“I never described Jerusalem as occupied territory. Resolution 242 in no way refers to Jerusalem and this omission was deliberate.” [bold by author]
The EU & U.S. Support of the Two Jerusalems Myth
Jerusalem was never an Arab city; Jews have held a majority in Jerusalem since 1870, and ‘east-west’ is a geographic, not political designation. It is no different than claiming the eastern shore of Maryland should be a separate political entity from the rest of the state. Arab claims to Jerusalem, a Jewish city by all definitions, reflect the “what’s-mine-is-mine, what’s-yours-is-mine” mentality underlying Palestinian concepts of how to end the Arab-Israeli conflict. Jerusalem’s Jewish connection dates back more than 3,000 years. Even after the Jews lost control of the city in 70 CE, a Jewish spiritual and physical bond with Jerusalem remained unbroken, despite 2,000 years of dispersion. Given the central role Jerusalem plays throughout Jewish history; given Arabs dismal record toward the rights of Jews and Christians in a sensitive, sacred city like Jerusalem; and together with the Arabs’ horrific record of bringing carnage to the City of Peace, Israel has the historical, moral, and legal rights to control Jerusalem as its undivided capital.
The Holy Places and Jerusalem
Jerusalem, it seems, is at the physical center of the Arab-Israeli conflict. In fact, two distinct issues exist: the issue of Jerusalem and the issue of the Holy Places. Sir Elihu Lauterpacht, a former judge ad hoc on the bench of the International Court of Justice and a renowned and respected scholar of international law at Cambridge University, has said:
“Not only are the two problems separate; [The Holy places and Jerusalem] they are also quite distinct in nature from one another. So far as the Holy Places are concerned, the question is for the most part one of assuring respect for the existing interests of the three religions and of providing the necessary guarantees of freedom of access, worship, and religious administration. Questions of this nature are only marginally an issue between Israel and her neighbors and their solution should not complicate the peace negotiations. “As far as the City of Jerusalem itself is concerned, the question is one of establishing an effective administration of the City which can protect the rights of the various elements of its permanent population – Christian, Arab and Jewish – and ensure the governmental stability and physical security which are essential requirements for the city of the Holy Places.”
Judge Lauterpacht wrote in 1968 about the new conditions that had arisen since 1948 with regard to the original thoughts of internationalization of Jerusalem: “-The Arab States rejected the Partition Plan and the proposal for the internationalization of Jerusalem.-The Arab States physically opposed the implementation of the General Assembly Resolution. They sought by force of arms to expel the Jewish inhabitants of Jerusalem and to achieve sole occupation of the City.-While Jordan permitted reasonably free access to Christian Holy Places, it denied the Jews any access to the Jewish Holy Places. This was a fundamental departure from the tradition of freedom of religious worship in the Holy Land, which had evolved over centuries. It was also a clear violation of the undertaking given by Jordan in the Armistice Agreement concluded with Israel on 3rd April, 1949. -The U.N. displayed no concern over the discrimination thus practiced against persons of the Jewish faith.-The U.N. accepted as tolerable the unsupervised control of the Old City of Jerusalem by Jordanian forces – notwithstanding the fact that the presence of Jordanian forces west of the Jordan River was entirely lacking in any legal justification. 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 notwithstanding 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-Day 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”
Today, Israel has reunited Jerusalem and provided unrestricted freedom of religion. Access of all faiths to the Holy Places in the unified City of Peace is assured. Judge, Sir Elihu Lauterpracht confirms this:
“Moslems have enjoyed, under Israeli control, the very freedom which Jews were denied during Jordanian occupation.”
Lastly, it should be noted: If UN Resolution 181 was valid today (which it is not), then so would be the provision in Part III-D that stipulates that after 10 years, the city’s international status could be subject to a referendum of all Jerusalemites regarding a change in the status of the city – a decision that today, as in the past, would have been made by the city’s decisive Jewish majority.
The UN and Jerusalem
Both the General Assembly and the Security Council have limited influence on the future of Jerusalem. Judge Sir Lauterpacht explained in 1968: “The General Assembly has no power of disposition over Jerusalem and no right to lay down regulations for the Holy Places. The Security Council, of course, retains its powers under Chapter VII of the Charter in relation to threats to the peace, breaches of the peace and acts of aggression, but these powers do not extend to the adoption of any general position regarding the future of Jerusalem and the Holy Places.”
Jerusalem must remain a unified capital under Israel’s exclusive sovereignty in order to protect the interests of the Jewish people and as the only guarantee that the interests of all other faiths will be protected.[Professor, Judge Schwebel served on the International Court of Justice since 1981. He was Vice-President of the Court from 1994 to 1997 and has been President from 1997 to 2000. A former Deputy Legal Adviser of the United States Department of State and Burling Professor of International Law at the School of Advanced International Studies of The Johns Hopkins University (Washington). Judge Schwebel opinions quoted in this paper are not derived from his position as a judge and president of the ICJ.]