Israeli settlements



The issues surrounding the Muslim Arabs’ war against the Jewish state of Israel, have been so muddied by her enemies, that it will take many excellent articles like this one by Daniel Greenfield, to finally unravel the truth behind the settlements. Israel is not an occupying power, though occupation is in fact a neutral term. It all depends upon the circumstances by which it came about.

NOTE: Either way, the world should be thanking the Israelis for the way they’ve handled the Arabs all these years. It’s in great contrast to how Arabs deal with other Arabs, which basically consists of lining them up and mowing them down.

Deconstructing the Israeli ‘Settlement’ Myth

Posted by Daniel Greenfield Bio ↓ on Jul 16th, 2012

Page 2:

“Under Article 2 of the Fourth Geneva Convention its provisions are only binding on signatory states. To apply the Convention to the 1967 borders, the ICC had to treat the territory as Jordanian for that purpose, even while contradictorily accusing Israel of depriving Palestinian Arabs of political representation.  Either the Arabs in the territories are Jordanian nationals, who are covered by the Convention, or they are Palestinian nationals and aren’t.

Article 4 of the Convention states: “Nationals of a State which is not bound by the Convention are not protected by it.” Unless the ICC can show that Fatah and Hamas are bound by the Convention, they are not protected by it. The only way that the Fourth Geneva Convention can apply to the territories is if the Arab Muslims living there are recognized as Jordanian nationals. But that would also invalidate any further claims to a Palestinian State.”

The strategy of Israel’s Muslim neighbors was to wage a terrorist war using groups that would not be bound by the Convention. It is far too late to claim that the terrorists were retroactively protected by the Fourth Geneva Convention—even though they were never bound by it.  It is also far too late to claim that the territorial demands that they would only begin making in the 1970s retroactively invalidated Israel’s prior claims to the area, or its towns and villages rebuilt at a time when Palestinian Nationalists were still claiming that Israel was actually part of Syria.

Finally, Al‑Khasawneh, one of the ICC judges, in a blatant conflict of interest, was an advisor to the King of Jordan and later became the Prime Minister of Jordan. The media outlets attacking the political allegiances of the Levy Report members might want to explain Al‑Khasawneh’s presence on a case involving the territorial interests of his monarchy.

Read the whole excellent article here.

3 Responses

  1. I have spent some time in Israel and found it very surprising the fake refugee camps where towns and cities, not camps. The occupied Westbank (which is Israel’s eastside) is miles and miles of empty land except where Israeli’s have built their own neighborhoods.

    How the world can call a proper town a camp or refer to empty land as occupied is a mystery to me.

  2. It is the occupation of Judea and Samaria by the fake Palis that is under occupation.

    Israel had a golden opportunity in 1967 to annexe both. This is what the Arabs would have dome or worse if they were in a similar situation. In fact they expected it. Instead the Israelis tried to show how wonderfully kind and understanding they were. Muslims will always, always, interpret such actions as a sign of defeat. And so here we are.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.