There is no law on Earth that commits nations to commit suicide. Rather, there are compendiums of law that have been passed down over the centuries, in dozens of languages, that detail in a myriad of complex situations from war to international piracy, the rights that sovereign nations inherently possess when they are required to defend their territory, citizens, and whatever national interests they deem vital to the survival of their civilization. Treaties, agreements between individual sovereign states, or groups of states, exist in the form of alliances, pacts and international organizations that define in absolute terms the justification for the use of military force against a perceived threat or territorial invasion.

Irwin Blank

As technology has progressed, that threshold has advanced beyond mere ground offensives, but also includes assault by sea and air forces, not limited to manned vehicles or conventional weaponry. However, in the absence of military aggression on a massive scale, even limited warfare, such as the launching of missiles, rockets, mortar and/or artillery fire upon a civilian population from beyond territorial lines into another nation’s lands, also justifies the use of even massive military power destroy the sources of aggression. The utility of such territory by irregular, eg.”terrorist” forces, is, de jure, a definitive factor in the legal justification for the aggrieved nation, to seize and/or, occupy such territory to remove the threat to its own sovereign lands and/or its population. The possibility of permitting such lands to be employed by an avowed enemy, whose singular and evidenced purpose, through oratory and written propaganda has exemplified its objectives to eliminate, by force of arms, through whatever means it deems applicable, the targeted nation and the physical liquidation of its entire population by death, cannot be permitted. The overwhelming historical and tactical practices of the so-called “Palestine Liberation Organization” since its inception in Cairo, Egypt in 1964, and its associated bodies, has never faltered from their own constitutional legislation, its aim to exterminate the State of Israel and its Jewish citizens, down to the last man, woman and child. Regardless whether that Jewish civilian area is Tekoa or Tel Aviv.

The appalling willingness of some Israeli leaders and the dastardly villainous continuing assault on the sovereignty of the State of Israel, the international opprobrium heaped on this single, Jewish country, to subjugate itself to an illegal amputation of what remains of its historic homeland, is beyond description, if it was not so dangerously contemptible.

It is akin to demanding that Israel place itself in a position that would make it entirely indefensible and relegate the state into the same weak and chokingly narrow armistice lines that invited aggression in 1948, 1956, numerous incursions by terrorist forces, and the ultimate war of June, 1967. Indeed, the so-called “peace process” is a naked attempt to carve what is left of the Jewish patrimony into pieces, to slice it into a salami and serve it up to be devoured, slice by slice by a rapacious and ravenous foe. Those glaringly attack inviting lines, which were bot borders at all, but the lines that remained after the Arab aggression of 1948-49, the attempt to kill Israel at its birth, an assault dubbed by Trygve Lie, the Sec’y General of the United Nations, “the first armed aggression since the end of the last war,” have never provided Israel with any security. In fact, the late foreign minister of Israel, Abba Eban, z”l, a man known for his dovish inclinations, called the lines of June 4th, 1967, the “Auschwitz borders.”

Now why all this historical background? I continue with the bedrock of all agreements with the UN, the so-called “Palestinian Authority”, the government of Egypt, and the many treaties, pacts that have followed including the Oslo Accords of 1993,  ad infinitum.

At the base of all these, somehow ignored or quoted and then overlooked, is a major piece of international legislation that was overwhelmingly accepted by all the major powers of the United Nations and many of the Arab states and the “Palestine Authority.” In November, 1967, The United Nations Security Council passed Resolution 242, upon which all subsequent Middle East documents either relied upon or quoted. It is this document that grants the State of Israel the right NOT to withdraw from Judea and Samaria, NOT to withdraw its sovereignty of ALL of Jerusalem, and it does NOT anywhere mention the words “Arab refugees”, “Palestinian refugees,” or “Palestine” ANYWHERE.

It states clearly that Israel should “withdraw from territories seized in the recent conflict”-it does not say which territories, it does not state how much of the territories, nor does it say when this withdrawal is to take place.

It does state that the withdrawal should be to”secure and recognized boundaries.” Israel has already withdrawn from 85% of the territories when it left the Sinai Desert in pursuant to the “peace treaty” with Egypt, it has already withdrawn to a recognized boundary with the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, and it has already withdrawn from the Gaza Strip, which was also conquered during the 6 Day War-although these boundaries are not secure in the classic sense, they are nevertheless, satisfactory of the resolution. But, since the remaining territories liberated by the Israel Defense Forces in June, 1967, namely the so-called “West Bank” was never a sovereign territory, nor was its annexation in 1950 by the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan ever recognized as legal(except by Britain and Pakistan) the areas known for the last 3000 years as Yehudah and Shomron, were only sovereign under the ancient Hebrew kingdoms, and therefore, have been re-incorporated into their original patrimony, and are, ex post facto, linked once again with their hinterland.

However, for the sake of modernity, no Israeli government need withdraw from a silly, little, millimeter from any of this land till there is satisfaction, BY ISRAEL, as a signatory to Res. 242, as to what is meant by “secure and recognized boundaries.” Actually, the PLO, or the PA, if you wish, is a non-entity that has no legal state-like status as the recent ruling by the International Criminal court in the Hague just recently ruled. Ergo, Israel is under no obligation whatsoever to accept anything from that body, be it a letter, a fax, or a candygram.

Let us continue. Resolution 242 also calls for a “just solution to the refugee problem.” It does not exclude, in this language the issue of the 850,000 JEWISH refugees who were evicted or forced to flee from Arab lands, on pain of death or the result of pogroms that swept the Moslem world in the wake of Israel’s independence. There is no specific mention of Arab refugees either. So, one can obviously infer that what transpired was a transfer of populations as a result of conflict-750,000 Arabs(many of whom were never indigenous to the mandate in the first place but came from all over the Arab world seeking work and the benefits that the Zionist enterprises brought to the land) fled as they were told by their leadership or from the natural fear of getting caught up in a war, and the 850,000 Jews who arrived in Israel after being robbed of all they had, some of whom traveled hundreds of miles by foot, and others who were brought to Israel by Jewish rescue organizations from certain Arab states after enough payoffs were made to local Arab potentates, prime ministers and sheiks. The difference is that Israel absorbed these Jews, made them citizens, gave them rights and trained them to the land, where the Arab states were content with permitting these hapless people, their own kith and kin, to subsist on the largesse of the United Nations Refugee Works Administration, thereby creating the world’s longest running case of welfare fraud in history. But be that as it may, isn’t it interesting that the two examples of the dissolution of the British Empire in 1948, the “Palestine Mandate” and the division of India/Pakistan, both brought about huge population transfers, except whereas the Moslems of India became the people of an Islamic Pakistan, an independent state, and the Arabs who fled from 23% of the mandate into the other 77% of the same territory, were never absorbed by their own fellow “Palestinians.” That also begs the question, are they really refugees at all? Actually, the Arabs in Yehudah and Shomron, Hebron and Bethlehem, Silwan and Shu’afat, never really left the mandate at all? So, I guess there really is no such thing as a “Palestinian refugee” after all!

So, as my premise states, Israel has no obligation to turn over any lands to an avowed enemy, has no obligation to discuss anything with any so-called “Palestinian Authority,” is under no obligation to discuss any “2 state solution” which, in truth, is the end result of Hitler’s “final solution of the Jewish question”, nor does Israel have to talk to any “Middle(I prefer Muddle) East Quartet, or any UN commission of any kind, involved with the illegal and excretious attempt to truncate her living body and open her doorway to death and destruction. Any Israeli government that participates in such a calumny is in jeopardy and should not ever have the trust of the Israeli electorate. We must immediately announce to the world that we are ready to accept the sacrifice of 77% of our historical inheritance, however painful that is, but we shall never surrender what is left to us. We shall never commit suicide, for suicide is a sin.

View Source
By Irwin Blank