Judea and Samaria is Israel by YJ Draiman

Judea and Samaria is Israel.

It is Jewish land since the days of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.

They, the Arab-Palestinians have the right to return to the Arab countries where they originally came from. (Face it it is the Arabs who illegally occupy Jewish land). The Arab countries forcefully expelled over a million Jewish families (after living in those countries for over 2,800 years and confiscated all their assets valued in the trillions of dollars) who now resettled in Israel and turned the desert into green pastures. The Arabs received after WWI over 6 million sq. miles of territory with a wealth of oil reserves, those territories are 70% vacant. The Jewish people were allocated their historical land which is all of Palestine aka The Land of Israel about 47,000 sq. miles. The Arabs in Jordan are occupying Jewish land; they expelled all the Jews and confiscated all their assets and not permitting Jewish people to live in Jordan.

YJ Draiman

Reminder ...There is NO such thing as any 'illegal Jewish settlements' located anywhere, in the Judea and Samaria area. Still-valid established International laws in the early 1920's at San Remo in April, confirms that at the Treaty of Sevres Article 95 August 1920. The 'League of Nations Mandate' (was suppose to enforce established international law) ratified on July 24th, 1922 by the Council of the League of Nations, entrusted Britain as trustee for the Jewish people to assist in re-establishing a Jewish State in the ENTIRE area west of the Jordan river ('Judea'). Article 6 of that Mandate ENCOURAGES, Mandates and ALLOWS and promotes 'Jewish settlement' all throughout the Judea and Samaria area. That Mandate was specifically dedicated only to 'Jewish National Rights' and exclusive political rights in all of the land between the Jordan River and Mediterranean sea. That's a well-documented FACT, of 20th century 'established international law'.

THE FIRST PARTITION OF PALESTINE/The Land of Israel 1920

At the time of the 1919 Paris Peace Conference there was no haggling over the size of the Jewish territory. The American Commission took it for granted that "the new State would control its own source of water power and irrigation, from Mount Hermon in the east to the Jordan." 8 As conceived at the time by the Plenipotentiaries, Palestine aka The Land of Israel was to comprise a minimum of some sixty thousand square miles, bounded on the north by Syria, on the southwest by Egypt, on the east by Iraq and Saudi and on the southwest by Egypt, on the east by Iraq and Saudi and on the south by Saudi and the Hejaz. The English viewpoint, embodied in British Peace Handbook No. 60 on Syria and Palestine, even contended that Damascus itself could very well be included, asserting that the whole "portion of the center of Syria that lies to the east of Jebel esh-Sharki may easily be separated from northern Syria and associated with Palestine." To the east it was understood that the Zionists could have any part of the great desert they wanted; and that the southern boundary was to be established at the historic line, the "River of Egypt." 9

Let this sink in for a moment: before the San Remo conference of April 1920 there did not exist a single Arab independent nation state. Not one. All 22 Arab states that exist today (as part of the Arab League) became nation states either as a direct result of the 1920 San Remo conference, or much later. Therefore, the legitimacy of Israel as a Jewish state is exactly equal or greater to the legitimacy of any of the Arab nation states.

Indeed, World-War I is considered the dawn of most modern nation-states. Four massive empires crumbled in its aftermath and were divided up into nation-states: The German, Austro-Hungarian, Russian and Ottoman empires. At that time, nations that had aspirations for self-determination stepped forward and presented their claims for independence to the League of Nations (the precursor to the United Nations). The Arabs stepped up as one single unified nation, and the Jews stepped up as another.

As you can see from eyewitness reports in the video above, the Arabs of Palestine viewed themselves as Syrian and as pan-Arabs. They had no aspirations for independence. Only later, once they secured all the rest of their Arab lands, did the Arabs change their story and put the Land of Israel under the microscope, redefining the conflict as Jews against Arab Palestinians within that small territory, rather than what it originally was: returning a small patch of Ottoman empire land to its rightful owners, the Jewish people, about 120,000 sq. km., while dividing 99% of the land among the Arabs, which is about 13 million sq. km. with a wealth of oil reserves. Furthermore, the Arabs received against Jewish protest over 77% of the Jewish and which became Jordan and now what is left west of the Jordan River, the Arabs what to take another part of Jewish Land. Enough is enough of taking Jewish Land. It time for us to stand firm and retain all our territory West of the Jordan River as the sovereign territory of Israel.

The results of the Paris (1918) and San Remo (1920) conferences and of the League of Nations was the Mandate for Palestine, granted to the British government as trustee for the Jewish people for the sole purpose of establishing a Jewish homeland in the Land of Israel:

Fifty-one member countries – the entire League of Nations – unanimously declared on July 24, 1922:

“Whereas recognition has been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country.”

There are two key legal points in the above statement (as pointed out by Dore Gold in the video at the end of the blog) which establish the Jewish people as the indigenous people of Palestine, and shatter the “Zionists are Colonialists” fallacy.

1. It recognizes that the “historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine” is a pre-existing right (“grounds for“), not a newly-granted right.

2. It calls for “reconstituting” their national home, not building a new national home from scratch.

In 2003, Attorney Howard Grief brought the minutes of the San Remo Conference and the text of the San Remo Resolution out of the dusty British Archives. Grief addresses the 99th Anniversary commemoration of the San Remo Conference of April 1920 about the importance the Conference and Resolution as the legal foundation of the modern State of Israel under International Law.

The Mandate as issued in San Remo in April 1920 included both sides of the Jordan river for the Jewish home.

It was unanimously adopted by the League of Nations (thereby ratifying the Balfour Declaration as much more than a British document).

In 1922, with no international debate or resolution, Britain unilaterally exercised Article 25 of the Mandate (which is in violation of previous Treaties), cut off the east bank of Palestine - Israel and named it Trans-Jordan. This was not based an any explicit League of Nations decision or any explicit mandate to create an Arab state in Jordan.

Trans-Jordan, more than 3 times the size of Israel, was handed over by Britain to about 300,000 Hashemite nomadic beduins, who originated in Saudi Arabia, in gratitude for their help against the Ottomans (The Arab Revolt as romanticized in the film Lawrence of Arabia).

Furthermore, Britain did not allow any Jews to settle or buy lands in Trans-Jordan, but allowed Arabs to continue and increase the rate of settling in Palestine – Israel west of the Jordan River. Thus, Jordan became the only country in the history of the world that was judenrein by design, and Palestine - Israel (from the Jordan to the Sea) became the only area in dispute between Jews and Arabs. Here is the text of Article 25, and you can see that there was no intention there to create a permanent Arab state in Jordan:

“In the territories lying between the Jordan river and the eastern boundary of Palestine as ultimately determined, the Mandatory shall be entitled, with the consent of the Council of the League of Nations, to postpone or withhold application of such provisions of this mandate as he may consider inapplicable to the existing local conditions, and to make such provision for the administration of the territories as he may consider suitable to those conditions”

On June 30, 1922, The US senate adopted Lodge-Fish Resolution [Joint Congressional Resolution (360)]: using stronger language than the Balfour declaration favoring the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people:

“Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled. That the United States of America favors the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which should prejudice the civil and religious rights of Christian and all other non-Jewish communities in Palestine, and that the holy places and religious buildings and sites in Palestine shall be adequately protected.” .

On September 21, 1922, President Warren G. Harding signed the joint resolution of approval to establish a Jewish National Home in Palestine. For more details, please see this link.

The formal recognition of Israel as the Jewish national home became binding international law not in 1947 or 1948, but in April 1920, when the resolutions of the San Remo conference were included as part of the Treaty of Sèvres Article 95 (August 1920), and were adopted and signed unanimously by all 51 countries of the League Of Nations:

ARTICLE 95.

The High Contracting Parties agree to entrust, by application of the provisions of Article 22, the administration of Palestine, within such boundaries as may be determined by the Principal Allied Powers, to a Mandatory to be selected by the said Powers. The Mandatory will be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2, 1917, by the British Government, and adopted by all the other Allied Powers, in favour of the re-establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.

Here is one more video that explains in more detail why the San Remo resolution of 1920 is even more important than the UN partition plan of 1947 (which was only a recommendation with no legal standing): The UN Resolution cannot supersede international Agreements and Treaties.