The Israeli West Bank

 

The Israeli West Bank (Randyjw; February 3, 2017)

 

I wrote an article a number of years ago in which I stated my premise that there had never been an Arab Palestinian state, since there had never been defined borders for such.

 

The so-called “Palestinian” entity of ancient times was actually the land of Israel/Judah, which the Romans had come to occupy (while still, for a time, operating with Herodian kings of Israel) over 1,800 years ago. Our conquerors renamed the land after our long-ago Philistine enemies, said to be THEN in the land during the time of David, our second Jewish king.

 

A state of government can exist in exile, if it had once been an actual state. A body of people who have never had a state to rule over can not be said to be a government in exile, although the replicated provisional bodies may have formed. They hold no real legal status as a government corpus over any real entity, since the entity is imaginary, to begin with.

 

To use the example I gave in my initial article, I stated that I could call myself President of Randyland — but, I wouldn’t be President over one square inch of land, if the entity of Randyland never existed, to begin with. This is the actual status of the Palestinians trying to declare themselves a state, when the realities are that they are still occupying lands within land that is Israel.

 

For that matter, the state of Jordan is an illegal creation wrested from the eastern portion of this so-called “Palestine”, when Britain took over a mandate of the League of Nations to administer the stewardship of the land, and to see to the “close settlement” of the Jews within it, according to the 1917 Balfour Declaration, which recognized Jewish historical claims to its rights to the land, and not based on suffrance.

 

Furthermore, when the Jordanians joined the collaborative 5-state Arab attack upon Israel in 1948, launched from their illegal portion of land designated for the Jewish state which was illegally hacked off from the whole of Israel/Palestine to begin with, the Arab victories in winning the Old City in Jerusalem and by Egypt’s win of Gaza in the south, and a small northern bit bordering Lebanon, were all considered illegal and were never recognized, but by one country, because they were won in an AGGRESSIVE attack upon the sovereignty of another nation, and not through the acquisition of lands via a DEFENSIVE action during a time of attack. These have legal meaning, which the world ignores in condemning Israel. These lands were legitimately regained by Israel in a defensive action to stave off the massing of Arab troops at Israel’s borders in 1967, and so have never lost Israeli designation. However, the world continues its anti-Semitic stances, and so favors the illegitimacy of the short-termed 19-year Arab occupation of Israeli land. Turkey, being the seat of the Ottoman Empire which previously held that land (in a chain of conquerors stretching back to Israel as the first, real recognized people indigenous to the land, being that the Canaanites no longer exist), legitimately lost it by continuing to take the losing side in the World Wars, as well as by the fact that it was never closely settled by them and was only tended, if at all, in an absentee ownership state of effendi-fellaheen relations, where a serfdom of indenturehood, such as that of a sharecropper, was practiced, with the serf living on the land in order to cultivate the produce of which was turned over, minus his own percentage in payment-in-kind, toward the effendi’s (absentee-owner’s) coffers.

 

My article, dated January 13, 2014, declared that there was no true government of Arab Palestinians, let alone a state in any part of the land. This is quite contrary to the actual Jewish government-in-exile status that Israel had had as a corporeal body of land in factual historicity. Theirs, if I’m using the correct legal terminologies here, were both a de jure state and a de facto state, ratified many times over in the reaffirmation of countless declarations, such as the Balfour Declaration and others.

 

I find it rather bothersome, and it’s unwarranted here for my proceding to do so, but it rankles me when we pretend that knowing such things, as we have known throughout history, is suddenly such a big surprise; and that we also pretend not to have such long-standing thousands-of-year ties to the land so that when we “rediscover” an ancient connection, like an archaeological item or ancient scrolls, we suddenly feign astonishment at the revelation. I don’t know what’s up with that, but we need to stop these pretenses, because others are starting to believe them!

 

In this vein, another “new” analysis by Ezequiel Doiny helps to synthesize many salient points, via his discovery of an article ©Jean-Patrick Grumberg for http://www.Dreuz.info addressing the Appeals Court ruling in Versailles, France that Israel, and not the Palestinians, were the rightful historical claimants to the land, even beyond the 1949 Armistice lines, which are not territorial demarcation lines by any account.

 

The article had, according to Doiny, taken into consideration the outside ruling of a foreign court in a matter involving Israeli land sovereignty, as it applied to a case involving the light rail system. Mahmoud Abbas was listed within it. An appeals Court date lists March 22, 2013, but there is no further pages attached here beyond this first, to follow along with the decisions as they had been made, per se, by the Court, as far as what looks to be the case to a non-French speaker, such as myself.

 

Doiny applies additional further considerations for the legal case for Israel’s sovereignty to the land, which is a nice addition to all of the other legal bases for determining that Israel is the true owner of the land. It’s unfortunate that such legal rulings are overturned by the popular vote in such bodies like the United Nations, whose supposed function is to clear any confusion of such issues.

 

Here is my original article:

 

Randyjw. “Any Leader of a State Without Recognized Borders is Illegitimate”. News Notes 1.wordpress.com; January 13, 2014:

(https://newsnotes1.wordpress.com/2014/01/13/any-leader-of-a-state-without-recognized-borders-is-illegitimate/)

 

And here is the article by Ezequiel Doiny:

 

Doiny, Ezequiel. “French Court Ruling: Israeli Presence in the ‘West Bank’ is Legal”. Israel National News.com; January 31, 2017:

 

(http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/20111)

 

The main site link of origination, as per Doiny’s mention: / ©Jean-Patrick Grumberg for (http://www.dreuz.info)

 

Update: February 4, 2017: Added additional paragraph.

 

Advertisements

8 Comments

Filed under Israel

8 responses to “The Israeli West Bank

  1. I probably also should have mentioned that when the Jordanians joined the collaborative 5-state Arab attack upon Israel in 1948, launched from their illegal portion of land designated for the Jewish state which was illegally hacked off from the whole of Israel/Palestine to begin with, the Arab victories in winning the Old City in Jerusalem and by Egypt’s win of Gaza in the south, and a small northern bit bordering Lebanon, were all considered illegal and were never recognized, but by one country, because they were won in an AGGRESSIVE attack upon the sovereignty of another nation, and not through the acquisition of lands via a DEFENSIVE action during a time of attack. These have legal meaning, which the world ignores in condemning Israel. These lands were legitimately regained by Israel in a defensive action to stave off the massing of Arab troops at Israel’s borders in 1967, and so have never lost Israeli designation. However, the world continues its anti-Semitic stances, and so favors the illegitimacy of the short-termed 19-year Arab occupation of Israeli land. Turkey, being the seat of the Ottoman Empire which previously held that land (in a chain of conquerors stretching back to Israel as the first, real recognized people indigenous to the land, being that the Canaanites no longer exist), legitimately lost it by continuing to take the losing side in the World Wars, as well as by the fact that it was never closely settled by them and was only tended, if at all, in an absentee ownership state of effendi-fellaheen relations, where a serfdom of indenturehood, such as that of a sharecropper, was practiced, with the serf living on the land in order to cultivate the produce of which was turned over, minus his own percentage in payment-in-kind, toward the effendi’s (absentee-owner’s) coffers.

    Like

  2. Thank you, Odedi.

    By the way, you are still showing up in my spam folder.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. I just updated my article using my responses to you; thanks! 🙂

    Liked by 1 person

Comments? Please be nice...

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s