Eli E. Hertz, Myths and Facts| 9 March 2016
Resolution 242 was adopted after the 1967 Six-Day War, when Israel was attacked by, and captured territory from, Egypt, Jordan, and Syria.
However, the resolution never mentions Jerusalem, nor does U.N. Resolution 242 call for a full withdrawal from territory captured but merely a withdrawal to “secure and recognized boundaries” that are to be negotiated by the parties concerned. Palestinian Arabs were not a party to the resolution.
Arthur Goldberg, the former U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. (in 1967) who helped draft the resolution, testified in regard to the omission of Jerusalem from Resolution 242:
“I never described Jerusalem as occupied territory. Resolution 242 in no way refers to Jerusalem and this omission was deliberate.”
In conclusion of the role the U.N. and international law may play in determining the future of Jerusalem, one may again quote Judge Lauterpacht:
“(i) The role of the U.N. in relation to the future of Jerusalem and the Holy Places is limited. In particular, 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 power under Chapter VII of the Charter in relation to threats to the peace, breaches of the peace and act of aggression, but these powers do not extend to the adoption of any general position regarding the future of Jerusalem and the Holy Places.
(ii) Israel’s governmental measures in relation to Jerusalem – both New and Old – are lawful and valid.
(iii) The future regulation of the Holy Places is a matter to be determined quite separately from the political administration of Jerusalem. Territorial internationalization of Jerusalem is dead – but the possibility of functional internationalization is not. The latter means, in effect, the recognition of the universal interest in the Holy Places situated in Jerusalem and the adoption of links between Israel and the world community to give formal expression to that interest.”
I expect that the Israeli investors with export interests will soon be doing the same as their US counterparts…. petitioning the Israeli gov to leave YS and make a deal so they can get on with making money outside Israel.
Bear Klein Said:
of course you are correct in this statement… the time has been ripe for a while now…. but who do you expect to annex C? Certainly not BB who has done everything to keep the jews in their euro designated ghetto boundaries of the existing major blocks.
Keli-A Said:
yes, they say that every couple of years… but other than that they have no basis for a claim of land…. as 242 gives then no land interest in the west bank… they are not even a party. The legal strength of 242 is not that it is a UNSC resolution but that Israel signed it, which gave it the legal force of treaty and agreement. The jordan israel treaty resolved and superseded ALL land issues wrt the west bank. The pals do not replace the jordanians as claimants. The border of israel with Jordan has already been determined and recognized at the river and Jordan NEVER mentioned any pal land interest in that treaty and no land interest is mentioned in any other legally binding document
Keli-A Said:
Yes, I am familiare with this but it does not dispute or rebut my claim that Jordan made no legally binding transfer of its repudiated claim to the PLO. They made a PR announcement that had no legal effect… and even it had legal effect with them and the pals it would have no legal effect on Israel as a 3rd party. One cannot without agreement create new legal obligations on 3rd parties without their consent. In any case, I have yet to see any document cited of this bogus transfer of rights to the pals from Jordan and the proof that it was no more than a PR stunt is that Jordan never incorporated that bogus transfer into its treaty with Israel… Jordan intentionally omitted anything beyond a refugee issue wrt the pals… no land involved. I still wait for any rebuttal evidence against my claim. Everyone assumes something with no evidence… even the lawyers here and elsewhere… no lawyers at Israpundit have ever cited a specific legal document as evidence of this bogus PR transfer…… and yet everyone assumes its truth and validity. I cannot understand why this has not become a discussion in Israel….. Oslo saved the pals and inferred a land interest… but Oslo has never been consummated..
I want to see the proof, see the evidence cited…. there is no legally binding document… that is my assertion.
Keli-A Said:
LOL, when this came out i had just gone to work in Jamaica.. it was a very popular dance tune….. and everyone was on strike….. but they sang about it and danced anyway.
Keli-A Said:
outside of this song I remember the “old time saying” as “what START bad a morning”….. meaning things end up according to how they start… but both interpretations basically say if you want it good then:
“wheel and come again”
start over with a good start
here is a suggestion for a new good start
“JEWISH SETTLEMENT IS YS IS LEGAL AND LEGITIMATE”
or another simple statement:
“Lets ban Muslim immigration until we can figure it out”
@ Keli-A:
The Women in Green and and 450,000 Jewish Israeli Citizens living in Judah/Samaria have not given up the right to have sovereignty declared there.
The Israeli Foreign Ministry also does not agree with you.
The timing is of no legal importance. Israel tried the Oslo Accords to resolve the conflict it did not solve it. The time is ripe for an Israeli position on a new paradigm which in my opinion start with annexing Area C.
Israel annexed the Golan and no one recognized to date. In a practical matter it has become a fact. The same would happen if Israel annexes Area C and gets rid of the terrorists and their supporters.
PRINCETON, N.J. — Americans’ views about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict remained steady over the past year, with 62% of Americans saying their sympathies lie more with the Israelis and 15% favoring the Palestinians. About one in four continue to be neutral, including 9% who sympathize with neither side, 3% who sympathize with both, and 11% expressing no opinion.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/189626/americans-views-toward-israel-remain-firmly-positive.aspx
There is an excellent website named “Israpundit” that has been posting one column after another about Obama’s impending aggression against Israel. I highly recommend that you have someone read it to you. Very. Slowly.
Based upon your arguments, it is clear that you have been consuming ample quantities of that which has been distilled.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qQK00RM3JsI
@ babushka:
Hey Babs I was referring to your belief “He wants to correct the historical mistake that he considers the founding of Israel to have been. While he is greatly constrained by practical domestic political realities, he will now make one final push to catalyze his desired result.”
So far speculation and rumor… 😛 who gives a shit about his ideological motivations which can be argued?
Name those practical domestic political realities.
How do you know that his motivations re: Israel are based upon his belief that “Israel was a historical mistake”?
I do appreciate your use of syllogisms in your argument.
You do know that if your argument is based all or in part on fallacious inputs it brings the whole argument down…. Like a house of cards. Yet you make nice arguments until distilled. I have long contended that his positions re: Israel is twofold to push Israel behind (in total )the green line or the pre67 borders and to de-nuke Israel. A nuclear Iran will render Israel’s nuclear deterrent ineffectual. 5 nukes in N Korea is proof. Israel behind the 67 borders and our enemies protected by Iranian nuke umbrella on paper can be taken care of by conventional means. Again my opinion only… I don’t pretend to know with any certainty what he has in mind. More important what BB does or doesn’t than what Lame duck Obama can do.
@ Bear Klein:
Israel alreasdy reliquished any rights to the west bank in word and in deed…. everybody knows that if it was ours we would have annexed the territory. So in the eyes of the world we are occupiers,colonialists and robbers. Demanding security for land is not a legal argument for rights. You can’t turn the clock back almost 50 years and say well we were mistaken it’s really ours. BB has already given up all of Y&S except 6-7% and the only points of contest is over those %. Begin is responsible mostly for this whole mess as he invented land for peace precidents and the non permanance of any established settlement when he gave up all permanent jewish settlements in the Sinai. Till then it neve happened not in recent modern history an never in biblical history…. You lose your territory by conquest not giving them away after defeating your enemies… Begin was a fucking idiot. A monster in fact.
@ Keli-A:
pre·scient
?preSH(?)?nt/
adjective: prescient
having or showing knowledge of events before they take place.
“a prescient warning”
I think it is wonderful that you are trying to learn English.
@ bernard ross:
Jordan Renounced Claims to West Bank, 1988
Why did Jordan renounce all claims to the West Bank (Judea and Samaria) in 1988?
As a result of Israel’s War of Independence in 1948, Jordan occupied East Jerusalem and Judea and Samaria, land known since that time as the “West Bank”. Read More: http://www.palestinefacts.org/pf_1967to1991_jordan_renounce_claims.php
@ bernard ross:
Abbas Says Palestinians No Longer Are Bound by Oslo Accord
Palestinian Authority president’s remarks at United Nations sends peace negotiations with Israel into uncharted territory
http://www.wsj.com/articles/abbas-says-palestinians-are-no-longer-bound-by-oslo-accord-1443637744
FM threatens to overthrow Abbas, cancel Oslo Accords if Palestinians go ahead with UN statehood bid
By seeking nonmember state status, the PA declares all agreements with Israel ‘null and void,’ official says; opposition MK slams planned Israeli countermeasures as ‘ridiculous
http://www.timesofisrael.com/jerusalem-threatens-to-cancel-oslo-accords-if-palestinians-go-ahead-with-statehood-bid/
@ bernard ross:
Haaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
Ethiopians – Everything Crash
Look deh now, everything crash!
Look deh now, everything crash!
Firemen strike!
Watermen strike!
Telephone company too!
Down to the policemen too!
What gone bad a-morning,
Can’t come good a-evening, whoi!
What gone bad a-morning,
Can’t come good a-evening, whoi!
Every day carry bucket to the well,
One day the bottom must drop out.
Every day carry bucket to the well,
One day the bottom must drop out.
Everything crash, Lord, whoo, yeah!
Me say look deh now!
(..)
Firemen strike!
Watermen strike!
Telephone company too!
Down to the policemen too!
What gone bad a-morning,
Can’t come good a-evening, whoi!
What gone bad a-morning,
Can’t come good a-evening, whoi!
I LOVE OPTIMISTIC SONGS 😛
@ babushka:
So ya think he don’t like Israel eh??? Very prescient.
@ woolymammoth:
http://dailycaller.com/2016/03/09/jon-voight-just-revealed-the-republican-hes-supporting-for-president/
They will seem considerably less hysterical to you if you don’t read them while standing under a palm tree.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WgAYscypyzE
@ babushka:
Your comments are sounding more “hysterical” by the minute. But okay, be that way…
The Bear, on the other hand has a modicum of flair, with regards to these polemics, quite correctly so.
By the way, someone I met at The Academy Awards the year after he was in a movie called Midnight Cowboy, John Voight, is supporting Trump. Voight’s support is a highly reliable indicator that Trump is, in fact, PROFOUNDLY PRO ISRAEL.
@ babushka:Maybe he is consciously trying to kill Israel? He is no friend to put it mildly.
He is sincerely trying to solve the problem of an imperial Jewish colonial outpost infesting Arabia and imposing hegemony upon the indigenous peoples. Read his books. Evaluate his political associations. It is all unmistakably evident: classic dialectical materialism. Obama is the prototypical leftist ideologue. Irrespective of his infinite narcissism, his motivation regarding Israel is entirely sincere. He wants to correct the historical mistake that he considers the founding of Israel to have been. While he is greatly constrained by practical domestic political realities, he will now make one final push to catalyze his desired result.
Obama is interested in his vain legacy. He is not trying to solve anything but leave an impact on history.
Israel should tell him that if he persists in getting the UN SEcurity Council to pass a resolution dictating terms it will trigger an Israeli annexation to preserve its rights.
Jordan was an illegal occupier of the West Bank and East Jerusalem from 1948 until 1967. They had won these in the Israeli Independence War.
You can not legally transfer what you do not own.
Jordan NEVER had any legal rights on Jerusalem!
What is most disturbing is the statement made by Ayelet Shaked who claimed that the Levy Report had become irrelevant!!! WHY?
@ bernard ross:
Obama’s latest UN maneuvers will also no doubt be a revision of and an attempt to further bury history in order to promote and institutionalize the destabilization of Israel.
@ Ted Belman:
Ted, you should look into this POV because if I am right it is iconoclastic…. certainly it merits investigation and discussion as no one has proven me wrong.
If I am right then all bets are off, everything crash!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QZqVUblgWxY
Ted Belman Said:
as you are an attorney, I expect a higher standard of evidence. As the main Israpundit how about having this idea investigated… what if everyones assumption is pure BS legally… so far that is my conclusion because if there were evidence it would already have been cited through the years… their only interest comes through Oslo in my opinion…. which is why it must be killed. If they declare a state then Oslo is dead and any legal land interest dies with it….. because they have NOTHING from 242 wrt LAND! Prove it.
I have posted this view many times and no one has ever presented or cited any evidence to the contrary.
Ted Belman Said:
I have never seen or heard of a document confirming that. the only thing I know is that years before Jordan disengaged and announced they would give their interest to the PLO…. First, I submit there is no document… why dont you check that out in Israel? Second, even if there were, it could have absolutely NO legal standing or obligation on Israel… Israels agreement on 242 was a negotiation between the parties to 242 and the PLO was not a party. I would love anyone to show any document that has any legal basis. If it is not in the treaty with Israel it has no legal standing… if it even exists which I doubt. think about it, its all BS, everyone assuming what is non existent, a consensus of dunces. IN court the evidence must be presented…so , show the evidence. The best evidence of its non existence and the fact that Jordan had no intention to follow through on their PR announcement is that nothing appears in the treaty with Israel and that treaty came later… therefore Jordan ignored any protection of PLO interests in the treaty.
I think what happened was that Jordan transferred an claims they had to the West Bank to the PLO then they entered a Peace Treaty with Israel.
The pals have NO legal land interest in the west bank derived from 242. I have repeated that many times. In fact, the land interests of 242 on the west bank have been completely satisfied by the Jordan Israel treaty in that they have agreed the boundary between them at the river… Jordan made no boundary with the PLO. Its a red herring canard that the pals can be substituted in 242 for the Jordanians as that is finished, done, gone. the only reference to the pals was as a refugee problem to be solve… but NO LAND INTEREST FROM 242!!!
The popular consensus is wrong, Jordan never conveyed to them any interest either, which everyone assumes with no evidence. that interest, even if it were conveyed would not have been binding on Israel. If Jordan had intended to follow through on their PR announcement of conveying an interest to the pals they would have at least mentioned it in their subsequent peace treaty with Israel which established the agreed and recognized boundaries. Its time that folks stopped mixing up pals with jordan wrt 242. Israel has no further legal obligation of ceding land to anyone. No one can show me where it is agreed in 242 that the pals are a party to the agreement wrt LAND. Why does Israel maintain this charade? Oslo was supposed to replace it but with Oslo dead so are any legal interests of the PLO in land. They can petition for self government perhaps under the self determination clauses of the UN charter but that would likely not work for them. Why does Israel perpetuate a fraud?