by Gavriel Queenann
Deputy foreign minister Danny Ayalon has narrated a video on YouTube, where he presents the truth of Judea and Samaria with animated aids.
In the video Ayalon answers the use of such terms as "West Bank," "occupied territories," and "1967-lines," and makes Israel's case in clear, factual terms without equivocation.
Ayalon says Judea and Samaria were taken from the occupying Jordanians during a defensive war and therefore the "settlements" are legal.
"The idea behind the creation of the video is distributed in an innovative and explains the Israeli position in fighting unilateral recognition of a Palestinian state," Ayalon said.
"Israel's argument based on facts get lost in the headlines and pictures. The challenge is to adjust the message to the medium and nature of the online world," he added.
The video is an English-language version of an earlier Hebrew-language video, produced in cooperation with international organization StandWithUs, and is presented with subtitles in several languages, including Arabic, Spanish, French, Russian, German and Hebrew.
Gavriel Queenann
Source: http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/145836
Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.
4 comments:
thank God, at last a clear, succinct definition!
DANNY - GET THIS PUBLISHED WITH A SUMMATION TRANSCRIPT ON THE HUFFINGTON POST ASAP!
Excellent a bit too long but very good.
This is a good case but not the best case for Israel. The best case is that exclusive political rights to Palestine were conveyed to England in trust for the Jews in the 1920s, after the WWI Allies divided up the captured lands of the Ottoman Empire, giving political rights to more than 99% of it to Arabs and Muslims, and the remaining less than 1% to the Jews in recognition of their long and historic attachment to that land. The WWI agreement at San Remo was confirmed in a "mandate" or trust agreement published by the League of Nations and confirmed separately by the US because it had decided not to become a member of the League. The confirmation by the US was initially by a joint Congressional Resolution but later it was incorporated in the Anglo-American Convention of 1924 and so became the domestic law of the United States and the UK as well as International Law. In 1948 when England chose to abandon its trust, the political rights devolved to Israel as representative of the Jews who were the beneficial owners.. See: Howard Grief, The Legal Foundations and Borders of Israel Under International Law (October 1, 2008), and Wallace Brand, "Israeli Sovereignty over Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria",
http://www.crethiplethi.com/israeli-sovereignty-over-jerusalem-judea-and-samaria/israel/2010/
The legislative history of the joint resolution showed US Congressional sentiment in favor of the Arabs and Muslims agreeing to live in a Jewish Democracy, but if not, they should be required to live with their brethern outside of Israel. See remarks of Congressmen Chandler and Appleby for example. All this makes irrelevant the question of whether the 1967 war by between Jordan and Israel was aggressive or defensive as sometimes alleged even though it was clearly defensive.
Post a Comment