1925 Wakf Temple Mount Guide or THE MOSQUE OF AL-AQSA or Temple mount - Jewish Temple - YJ Draiman

1925 Wakf Temple Mount Guide or AL-HARAM AL-SHARIF - JERUSALEM - r2

1925 Wakf Temple Mount Guide or THE MOSQUE OF AL-AQSA or Temple mount 

taken by force 16 pages.

Page 1 Cover and page 2 picture view of the Haram area from North to West

In 1925 Muslims that controlled Temple Mount produced this guide which as it turns out is a pretty accurate history showing that they do NOT hold the original claim to the mount, but instead, took it by force. Admitting that even their own scholars admit it belonged to the Jewish people.

Before 637 CE/AD Jerusalem was the Capital of the Jewish people for over a thousand years. Thereafter it was occupied by various conquering Nations as Occupied territory, It was allocated to the Jewish people after WWI under the 1920 San Remo Treaty and confirmed by the 1920 Treaty of Sevres and Lausanne.

Read it for yourself and decide. Don’t take my word for it.

1925_Wakf_Temple_Mount_Guide.pdf

Text only transcription of the guide for ease of reading.

A Brief Guide To AL-HARAM AL-SHARIF JERUSALEM - Temple Mount

Published by the Supreme Muslim Counsel

PRICE P.T. 15

The Sacred Enclosure will normally be open to visitors between 7.30 a.m. and 11.30 a.m. daily (Fridays excepted).

Admission may be gained by the gate known as Bab al-Silsileh.

Jerusalem 1925

-3-

IMPORTANT NOTICE.

Visitors should bear in mind that the whole of the Haram Area, and not only it’s edifices, is scared to Muslims; and that they will be expected to pay due regard to its sanctity. In particular, they must abstain from smoking anywhere in the Area, and from bringing dogs with them.
The visiting-hours are from 7.30 a.m. to 11.30 a.m. daily, (Fridays excepted) and visitors are particularly requested to leave punctually at 11.30 so as not to hinder the observance of the midday-prayer.
Admission may best be gained by the gate known as Bab al-Silsileh. It would save trouble and delay if visitors were to make it a point of entering the Haram by that gate.

N.B. The photographs in this Guide are reproduced by courtesy of the American Colony.

– 4 –

THE HARAM
–
HISTORICAL SKETCH
The words al-Haram al-Sharif, which can perhaps best be rendered by “The August Sanctuary”, denote the whole of the sacred enclosure which it is the object of this Guide to describe.
Its plan is roughly that of a rectangle whose major axis runs from north to south; its area is approximately 145,000 square meters.
If you wish to have some idea of its extent and to see it whole before proceeding to examine it in detail, you would be well-advised to begin your visit by walking to the north-west corner, and there ascending the flight of steps which lead up to the disused building on the right, you will see the whole area spread before you. The view shown on the frontispiece (Fig. 1) was taken, although at a considerable altitude, from the very spot where you are standing.

The two principal edifices are the Dome of the Rock, on a raised platform in the middle, and the mosque of al-Aqsa against the south wall. Other buildings which we shall consider later lie dotted about here and there. On the left along the east wall the double portals of the Golden Gate appear. On every side, trees break the prospect, which lend a peculiar charm to the scene.
The side is one of the oldest in the world. Its sanctity dates from the earliest (perhaps from prehistoric) times. Its identity with the site of Solomon’s is beyond dispute. This, too, is the spot, according to universal belief, on which “David built there an altar unto the Lord, and offered burnt offerings and peace offerings”. (1)

But, for the purposes of this Guide, which confines itself to the Muslim period, the starting-point is the year 637 A.D. In that year, the Caliph Omar occupied Jerusalem and one of his first acts was to repair to this site, which had already become sacred in the eyes of Muslims as the place to which the Prophet was one night miraculously translated. The site had long since been neglected. The Caliph and his four thousand followers found little more than desolation and rubbish. There were the ruined walls of the Herodian and Roman periods, the remains of an early basilica (probably on the present site of al-Aqsa), and the bare Rock. Yet from this rock had the Prophet according to the tradition, ascended to heaven on his steed. So the Caliph ordered a mosque to be erected by its side. His orders were executed, and the building was seen and described by Bishop Arculf who visited Jerusalem about 670 A. D. But no vestige of it remains today, save for the name “Mosque of Omar” which is still, but quite wrongly, sometimes used for the Dome of the Rock.
With the reign of’ Abdul-Malek ibn Marwan, the Umayyad, 685-705 A.D., the history of the present buildings begins. 

Jerusalem
___
2 Samuel XXIV, 25.

Page 5 - Pic. The fountain Sabil of Qait Bay

– 6 –

was a holy city, to Muslims as well as to others, and to the energetic and pious caliph its glorification seemed an obvious duty. He collected large sums of money, amounting (say the Arab historians) to “seven times the revenue of Egypt”; and with that he built the Dome (691 A.D.), and the mosque of al-Aqsa (693 A.D.), both of which, according to medieval Arab travelers and chroniclers, were of unsurpassed magnificence. But in subsequent years, the buildings suffered much from earthquake shocks and underwent various restorations. In the year 407 A. H. (1016 A.D.), an earthquake shock caused the Dome to collapse, and it was re-erected six years later by the Caliph Hakem.
A new chapter begins with the capture of Jerusalem by the Crusaders in 1099. They occupied the Haram Area and turned its monuments to different uses. The Dome of the Rock was turned into a church and an alter erected on the Rock itself. The edifice was regarded by them as the veritable Temple of the Lord (Templum Domini) from which the Knights Templar whose Order was formed there take their name. It is interesting to note also that, as Temple of the Lord and symbol of the Order, it served as a model for churches which were later erected at various places in Europe, such as Aix-la-Chapelle, Metz, Leon, and the Temple Church in London; and that it figures in Raphael’s famous picture of the “Sposalizio” (Brera, Milan,) and, still more recognizably,
in the picture of “The Maries at the Sepulcher”, attributed to Hubert von Eyck. The mosque of al-Aqsa, on the other hand, was transformed in to a royal residence known as the Palace of Solomon; while the vast substructures below the south-east corner of the Area were used by the Knights as stables.
The end of this chapter came in 1187, when Saladin captured Jerusalem and drove the Crusaders out. One of his first acts was to put back the buildings to their former use as places of Muslim worship, and he caused every vestige of the Templar's occupation to be removed. At the same time he carried out important embellishments.
In the Dome of the Rock, he caused the walls to be covered with marble, and set up the beautiful inscription which may still be seen above the open gallery of the cupola.
He also restored the stucco incrustation of the inner dome, which remains to this day. In the mosque of al-Aqusa, he carried out restoration and embellishments, of which the chief were the fine mosaics on the drum of the dome and the beautiful pulpit adjoining the prayer-niche.
The Haram Area has remained in Muslim hands ever since.
For although Jerusalem was again occupied by the Crusaders (1229-1244), yet their occupation did not extend to the sacred enclosure which it had been agreed should remain in Muslim possession. During the three centuries which followed, various repairs and additions were made; but the most important restoration was that which was carried out, after the Turkish conquest.
In the reign of Sulaiman the Magnificent (1520-1566). This sultan whose works are still to be found all over the Holy City, carried out a wholesale renovation of the Dome of the Rock. A large part of the decoration in glazed tiles upon the exterior of the shrine and most of the windows were added during his reign. Since then,

Page 7 - Pic The Southern Arcades (Mawazine) and pulpits Burliancddin 

– 8 –

both buildings have undergone different restorations which have for the most part marred rather than enhanced their beauty.
This is more particularly the case with the tiles on the exterior of the Dome of the Rock, which the hand of the restorer has here and there shifted or replaced most unhappily; and it is the present concern of the authorities of the Haram to try and undo the damage and restore to these decorative features something of their former harmony.

THE DOME OF THE ROCK
________________

The Dome of the Rock stands on an irregular platform whose level is some 12 feet above that of the Area. It is approached from every side by flights of broad steps surmounted at the landing by graceful arcades (Fig. 3) known as Mawazin, that is to say ‘scales’, because of the traditional belief that on the Day of Judgment the scales of good and evil will be suspended there.
Having ascended the steps on the raised platform, you should, before entering the edifice, walk around it and examine it from the outside first. Its plan is that of a regular octagon inscribed in a circle of 177 ft. diameter. It has four entrances, each of which faces one of the points of the compass: on the West, The Bab al-Gharb, or west gate; on the north, the Bab al-Janna, or gate of paradise; on the east, the Bab Daud, or gate of David; and on the south, the Bab al-Qibla or south gate. This last gate fixes the direction in which prayers are to be said, namely the direction of Mecca. The walls of the building are decorated with marble facings on the lower courses and with colored glazed tiles above.
The tiles which form this decoration date for the most part from the end of the reign of Sulaiman the Magnificent (v. page 6) when the art of Oriental ceramic decoration was perhaps at its height.
Unfortunately, a great many of the original tiles have fallen off, and others have at various times been set in their stead without apparent regard for the harmony either of color or pattern. Still, the effect is striking and, especially in certain lights, beautiful.
The frieze is inscribed with verses from the Koran. Above rests the Dome, as rebuilt by the Caliph Hakem in 1022, slightly flattened on one side, and surmounted by the Crescent. The edifice itself is substantially that which was erected by ‘Abdul-Malek ibn Marwan; but the outer decorations that we have just seen are mostly due to Suliaman the Magnificent, and to later restorers.

On the east side of the Dome of the Rock, facing the Bab Daub. or gate of David, stands an elegant little edifice, also surmounted by a dome, which look at first sight like a miniature representation of its larger brother. The room which supports the Dome and it’s drum rests on two concentric rows of columns neither of which is encased by walls. On the south side is a Mihrab, that is to say the prayer-recess. The edifice is variously known as Mahkamat Daud, (i.e. Tribunal of David) and Qubbat al-Silsileh (i.e. Dome of the Chain), from the legendary belief that on its site was the place of Judgments where verdicts were given by a miraculous chain. For as the legend has it, a chain was once suspended

Page 9 - Pic The Dome of the Rock (from the North-East)

– 10 –

from heaven over this spot, to which it was the practice in Solomon’s time to appeal in cases of conflicting evidence. Each witness was made to grasp the chain in turn: if he succeed in holding it, his truthfulness was thereby vindicated, but if it eluded his grasp, then he was a manifest liar. The edifice is said by some historians to be contemporaneous with the Dome of the Rock; but it is an established fact that it has been rebuilt more than once, albeit with the original columns which are in the Byzantine style and were undoubtedly taken from other buildings. Their number has varied: at the present time there are eleven in the outer, and six in the inner rows. (Fig. 4) We will now enter the Dome of the Rock (Qubbal al-Sakhra) by the west gate. The metal doors on either side of the entrance are worthy of notice; and inscription which was only recently discovered proves them to have been made and set up during the reign of the Mamluk Sultan Qait Bay, towards the end of the XVth. century. A few steps further, we find ourselves in the interior of the building. At first sight it is almost too dark to see; but as the eye gets used to the subdued light, the beauty of the structure and the splendor for the ornamentation reveal themselves. In the centre, vertically below the dome, is the Sacred Rock, an irregular mass of yellowish stone. This is where the Crusaders had set up an altar and traces can still be seen of the steps which once led up to it. The dome rests on an inner system of piers and columns forming a circle and connected with each other by a wrought-iron grille, dating from the XIIth. century — a unique remnant of the Crusaders’ decorations. This inner row is formed of four rectangular piers, beautifully adorned with marble facings dating from the XVth. century, and twelve monolithic columns with Byzantine capitals carrying semicircular arches. Above is the drum with its rich mosaics, its delicate inscription on bands and medallions, and 16 windows; while, resting on the rim above the clerestory windows, is the inner (wooden) cupola, with its remarkable stucco ornamentation, ordered by Saladin in 1189.
Concentric with inner system which we have just described is the outer octagonal row of piers and columns supporting the roof. The piers in this row are eight in number and are of massive size, covered with XVth. century marble facings; while the columns, of which there are sixteen, are marble monoliths
taken from some older building, probably Hadrian’s Temple of Jupiter. The capitals, which are of varying design, belong to the late Greco-Roman or the early Byzantine period. Above each capital is an abacus on which rests the decorated beam which runs round the octagon and serves as an “anchor” beam from pier to pier–an interesting architectural feature, probably of Arab origin, which is characteristic of the earliest mosques. Between each pair of piers are three arches richly adorned with old mosaic dating, except for certain later restorations, from the VIIth. century. Above is a narrow band of blue tiles on which runs an inscription in gold Cubic letters, which is of great historical importance, for it records the date of the construction of the edifice and the name of the builder, with a chronological inconsequence which tells its own tale. The date is given as A.H. 72 and the

Page 11 - Pic The Rock

– 12 –

name as that of the Caliph al-Mamun who reigned in A.H. 197-218: an obvious anachronism, of which the explanation is that the name of the later Caliph was substituted for that of his predecessor, ‘Abudul-Malek ibn Marwan , the real builder of the Dome of the Rock, while the original date remained unchanged.
The walls of the edifice, which as we have seen form a regular octagon, are covered with marble slabs and pierced with windows dating, for the most part, from Sulaiman’s restorations.
The slabs are of beautiful marble specially chosen for its smoothness and remarkable veining. The windows are made of plaster, and their pattern consists of an intricate openwork tracery in which are inserted bits of colored glass. The effect is one of great softness and richness of color, and this is partly due to
the skill with which the tracery is hollowed out of the plaster and cut away towards the inside in such a way that the openings become provided with a kind of cone for the softer diffusion of the rays of light.
A detailed description of the Dome of the Rock would be beyond the scope of this Guide. Its principal features have been mentioned and described in sufficient detail, it is believed, to give the visitor an adequate summary of its history and some help towards the appreciation of its magnificence.

THE MOSQUE OF AL-AQSA
____________________

Leaving the Dome of the Rock by the west gate, the visitor will notice, some 50 yards away on the right, a small octagonal domed edifice of semi-oriental and semi-Gothic appearance. This is the Qubbal al-Mi’raj or Dome of the Ascension. It was originally built in commemoration of the Prophet’s miraculous ascension, and rebuilt in its present form about the year 1200 A.D., that is to say some thirteen years after the capture of the Holy City by Saladin and at a time when Gothic influence in building, which had been imported by the Crusaders, was still at its height.
The monument is not open to visitors.
Turning towards the south, we cross the platform to the arcades on its southern side, passing on the way the marble pulpit of Burhaneddin (Fig. 3) which was built by the judge of that name in the middle of the XVth. century. The pulpit is crowned by a dome supported by trefoil arches resting on columns,
and is an interesting as well as a beautiful example of the work of that period. Beyond the pulpit are the steps leading down to the court of the mosque of al-Aqsa. Immediately in front is the fountain of ablutions, and beyond that is the mosque itself.
The porch, which is the most recent part of the building, was added by the Sultan al-Mu’azzam, a nephew of Saladin, in the XIIIth. century. An inscription above the middle archway records the date as 634 A.H. (1236 A.D.). The porch consists of a facade of seven pointed arches, corresponding to the seven
front doors of the mosque, and affords yet another example of the Crusaders’ influence, although not a very happy one.
The interior of the mosque is unfortunately only partly accessible

Page 13 - Pic The Al-Aqsa Mosque (front)

– 14 –

to visitors at the present time, on account of the considerable repairs which have to be carried out to that part of the buildings which supports the dome. But visitors are admitted to the nave and aisles and can gain some idea of the whole. The nave, formed by two rows of massive columns with capitals, is the oldest part of the mosque. On either side of it, is an aisle, both of which date also from the earliest period; the outside aisles are of more recent construction. The columns of the nave were probably taken from Justinian’s basilica; while the capitals, which are mostly of the acanthus-leaf and wicker-work patterns,
date from Byzantine times and are probably contemporaneous with the construction of the mosque itself. The columns support a system of pointed arches of which the exact date is not known for certain. Their pointed form, however, shows plainly that they belong to a later period that the VIIth. century, for in that period the pointed form had not yet been evolved and the horse-shoe arch, as we have seen in the interior of the Dome of the Rock, was still prevalent. The columns are connected by wooden tie-beams, which as we have seen (page 10) is a device characteristic of early Arab monuments. Above the arches are two rows of windows; the lower open on the inner aisles, the upper are clerestory windows admitting air and light from the outside. (Fig. 7).
Above the crossing stands the dome resting on a circular drum supported by a system of arches and pedantries, which are themselves borne at the tour corners by groups of pillars and capitals. The dome, which is of wood protected on the outside by a covering of lead sheeting, is ornamented with a handsome stucco incrustation of the same style as that of the dome of the Qubbat al-Sakhra. This decoration may, like its counterpart in the Sakhra, date from the time of Saladin; but be this as it may, it was completely renovated, if not actually made in the first instance, but the Sultan Muhammad ibn Qalaun in the year 728 A.H. (1327 A.D.), as the beautiful inscription on the blue band around the cupola testifies. The drum and the four arches with their pedantries are covered with a beautiful mosaic on a gold ground dating from the end of the XIIth. century, that is to say from the restoration carried out by Saladin (v. page 6).
To the west of the crossing runs the broad transept with its colonnade of pillars taken from older buildings. A few interesting Byzantine capitals of wicker-work design are worth noticing. The transept is continued into a vaulted gallery which dates from the occupation of the Crusaders, and was used as quarters by the Knights Templar.
The Mihrab (or prayer recess) in the south wall, facing the nave, is ornamented with mosaics and flanked with splendor and elegant marble columns. According to an inscription in mosaic above the niche, the work is due to Saladin. To the right of the Mihrab stands a handsome pulpit made of wood and beautifully ornamented with inlaid ivory and mother-of-pearl. It was made in Aleppo, as the inscription on it testifies, by the Sultan Nureddin in the year 1168 A.D., and was brought to Jerusalem by order of Saladin towards the end of the century. Above the prayer-niche are windows dating from the XVIth. century.

Page 15 - Pic The Al Aqsa Mosque (interior)

– 16 –

THE SUBSTRUCTURES

_______________

Leaving the mosque of al-Aqsa by the front entrance, we turn to the left and proceed to the south-east corner of the Haram Area where a staircase leads down in to the vast subterranean substructures known as Solomon’s Stables. The first flight of steps takes us down to the small chamber, now used as a place of Muslim worship, which was believed in medieval times to have been associated with Jesus Christ’s infancy. This belief was prevalent long before the advent of the Crusaders and was subsequently accepted by them. In the angle between the west and south walls of the chamber is a little dome borne upon four marble columns; and underneath the dome is a small niche lying horizontally, which was believed in early times to have been the Cradle of Christ and referred to under that name by several Arab historians.
In the west wall of the chamber, a door opens into a staircase descending to Solomon’s Stables. This is a vast subterranean chamber, of roughly rectangular shape, of which the chief feature is the imposing size of the piers. Of these, there are fifteen rows of varying size and height supporting the vaults on which rests the roof. Little is known for certain of the early history of the chamber itself. It dates probably as far back as the construction of Solomon’s Temple. According to Josephus, it was in existence and was used as a place of refuge by the Jews at the time of the conquest of Jerusalem by Titus in the year 70 A.D.. We also know that this space was used by the Knights Templar as stables, and the holes to which they tethered their horses can still be seen in the masonry of the piers. Such evidence as is afforded by the masonry itself, and more particularly by the contrast between the lower and the upper courses of the larger piers, would tend to show that they belong to two distinct periods, and that the upper parts and the vaults were of Arab construction superimposed upon ancient foundations.
The substructures supporting the nave of the mosque of al-Aqsa are not accessible.
______________________________________

The best way out is across the esplanade, past the porch of the mosque of al-Aqsa, and back to the Bab al-Silsileh. An alternative would be to continue northwards past the Bab al-Silsileh to the gate known as Bab al-Quttanin, a handsome gate dating from the reign of Sultan Muhammad ibn Qalaun (1336 A.D.) and typical of XIVth century Arab work. To the south-east of this gate is the Sabil (or drinking fountain) built about the year
1460 A.D. by Mamluk Sultan Qait Bay – an attractive building, perfect of its kind. (Fig. 2).

G. A.
___________________________________

Franciscan Printing Press, Jerusalem - back page

1925 Wakf Temple Mount Guide or Temple mount taken by force.

In 1925 Muslims that controlled Temple Mount produced this guide which as it turns out is a pretty accurate history showing that they do NOT hold the original claim to the mount, but instead, took it by force. Admitting that even their own scholars admit it belonged to the Jewish people.

Israel does not have to defend its’ legitimacy! r4 - YJ Draiman

Israel does not have to defend its’ legitimacy! r4
Israel’s rights to the land is ingrained in history, archeological findings, international law and possession. Just like the Arab States have not been required to defend their legitimacy, Israel should also not be required to defend its’ legitimacy. The 21 Arab States and the State of Israel were set up by the Allied Powers after WWI, when the Ottoman Empire relinquished its title to the territories to the Allied Powers. The British were assigned as trustee for the Jewish people to help reconstitute the Jewish State as Implemented by the San Remo Treaty of 1920. The San Remo Treaty adopted the Balfour Declaration of 1917 and confirmed by the 1920 Treaty of Sevres and Lausanne. Of importance is the fact treaty terms and documents prove there was no state allocation of land to any other people or nation other than the Jewish people in Israel. It should also be noted the League of Nations set up the Mandate for Palestine as a State for the Jewish people with exclusive political rights.
The Jewish people who lived in Israel for over 4,000 had additional Jewish immigration in the mid 1800. The local Jewish people with the infusion of more Jewish immigration, resources, funding and with the explicit permission by the Ottoman government, started developing the land. Within a short time the Jewish people started turning the desert and desolation into green pastures, thus, building an economy, agriculture, housing and industry. Many Arabs from neighboring depressed states who viewed this development as an opportunity for work and an improved standard of living, came to work in Palestine.
It is of interest in this conflict to take into consideration. The Arab countries expelled over a million Jewish families, confiscated their assets, businesses, homes and land 5-6 times the size of Israel 120,440 sq. km. valued in the trillions of dollars. Most of these expelled Jewish families from Arab countries were resettled in Greater Israel.
Over the past 68 years Israel has become a thriving nation with exemplary innovation in education, technology, high tech industry and medicine. Many nations admire Israel’s outstanding development and innovation. Israel has always been extending a helping hand to any nation that wants to learn and advance in industry, technology and medicine.
The Arab-Palestinians saw an opportunity to get land and a country that was developed and flourished by the Jewish people. They decided that through intimidation, harassment and violence to usurp the Jewish habitants into capitulating to their scheme of an Arab-Palestinian State on Land allocated to the Jewish people . The Arab-Palestinians live on charity from the nations of the world. They are unwilling to help themselves. After the 1967 war when Israel defeated the 5 Arab armies who tried to destroy it, Israel started employing many of the Arabs in the liberated Jewish territory, educating them in agriculture and water resources. In the following years the standard of living of the Arabs jumped 5 fold and more, and their economy and housing blossomed. When the terrorist organization entered the picture and instigated the Arab population to start terror and violence against the Israelis, the economic advancement was slowed down if not halted. The dire predicament of the Arab-Palestinians is of their own making.
If you look at Arab land it is desolate and barren, with few exceptions. At the same time, the Jewish land is blooming and developing at an accelerated tempo. The Arabs, rather than follow the example set by Israel, tried to take the Jewish land by force and lost 4 wars in a span of 25 years.
The Arab-Palestinians current actions in the political and legal arena is a result of losing 4 wars and various battles with Israel. They not only could not win ground, but in fact have caused themselves a downward spiral toward economic desolation.
The Arab-Palestinians have switched tactics and have now gained more ground and concessions by playing the peace game. The Arab-Palestinians obfuscation and disinformation campaign along with various pleadings in front of the U.N. and other International bodies has gained them more inroads. The power of oil and the Arab Countries, who do not want the Arab-Palestinians to return to their countries, are helping them promote the false information, and utilizing their numerical control in the U.N. to pass any resolution that they deem necessary to advance their cause.
Money, power and greed promoted hate and anti-Semitism by the Arabs in order to force Israel into surrendering territory to the Arab-Palestinians. The Arabs are trying to initiate land piracy camouflaged as legal rights to the land of Israel.
Jewish resistance to persecution by the Arabs and the world at large: Any level headed individual would think that after WWII and the 6 million Jews exterminated in the Holocaust (plus another 5 million of other ethnic groups) would diminish, if not eliminate anti-Semitism and baseless hatred. It seems that no matter the amount of unwarranted persecution, and no matter the sacrifices the Jewish people have endured through the ages, Anti-Semitism continues to raise its ugly head.
The Media is guilty of escalating hostilities and violence in Israel and elsewhere. The Media has a responsibility to deliver fair and unbiased reporting. They influence the information that people rely on. It is an awesome responsibility and it must be handled with factual un-slanted reporting. Peoples lives depend on it; maybe yours or someone you love. Do we need a legal task force to discipline the Media when they intentionally distort the truth and or stage events for Media sensationalism? I would like your comments and input.
The affects on the world at large: Has humanity lost its values and fairness? The answer is no. In order to lose something, one must first possess it and the truth is, the world has never had total control of values and fairness. In today’s world, where money and power is pursued at all costs (see Machiavelli) , the core family unit is disintegrating and family values deteriorating. Honesty, integrity and fair-play seem to be a thing of the past. Where are we as human beings of the 21st century heading? Obviously downward.
Take some time to reflect on the truth of what is stated here. Do you really want this kind of world for your children? Senseless hate and destruction must not be tolerated. I urge you to wake up, take the bull by the horn and pursue a path of correction, or we are doomed as a civilized people.
YJ Draiman
P.S. How many holidays do the Arabs celebrate due to historical events in the land of ancient Israel. The Jewish people celebrate most of their holidays and fast days in memory of and the goal and aspiration to return to Israel and rebuild the Temple in Jerusalem – where it was before it was destroyed and desecrated by the enemies of the Jews. Many of the Jewish prayers for thousands of years recite the love of Israel and the Jewish aspirations to return to their ancestral land and bring back its glory and holiness.

In Israel, in order to be a realist you must believe in miracles.
Ben Gurion

“Nobody does Israel any service by proclaiming its ‘right to exist.’ [As a Jewish State] Israel’s right to exist, like that of the United States, Saudi Arabia and 152 other states, is axiomatic and unreserved. Israel’s legitimacy is not suspended in midair awaiting acknowledgement. . . .There is certainly no other state, big or small, young or old, that would consider mere recognition of its ‘right to exist’ a favor, or a negotiable concession.”
Abba Eban

Greater Israel belongs to the Jewish people under International Law! - YJ Draiman

Greater Israel belongs to the Jewish people under International Law!
The Jewish People’s historical right to the land of Greater Israel had been recognized by the international community and upheld by the rule of public international law. Greater Israel was and is the homeland of the Jewish people. In the past 3,500 plus years it has not been the homeland of any other people. Although is was occupied by various conquerors who destroyed the land and made it desolate and barren. When the Jewish people returned in greater numbers the land blossomed, turned green and fruitful.
Any view that contradicts this statement is pure distortion of the facts and history.
Israel is not obliged to support the creation of an Arab state west of the Jordan river alongside Israel and it must not concede to any such arrangement or the security and survival of Israel will be compromised.
The Oslo Agreements (which is now null and void) were made with a view to enhance “a just, lasting and comprehensive peace.” Yet, since their coming into effect the Middle East has witnessed not peace but more violence of the worst kind in recent history. As of today the Oslo agreement is null and void. The Arab Palestinians have not lived up to any of the agreement. The Arab Palestinians promote, preach and teach their children and the masses to create terror, violence and suicide bombing. Their only goal is the destruction of the Jewish State, read the Palestinian and Hamas Charter.
The establishment of the Palestinian Authority should serve as a “guide to the bewildered” of the grave risks posed by such an Arab State, which may eventually lead to the destruction of the Jewish State. Any land for peace compromise by Israel has made the situation worse. Sadly, appeasement and concessions by Israel only aggravated the situation and increased violence. Israel must stand its ground, resist unjust world pressure and protect its citizens at all costs. Any concessions by Israel will only make the situation worse and bring about more violence and death, as the past experience has proven. The Summer of 2014 Gaza war only reaffirms the conviction that Israel must not under any circumstances concede any territory to the Arabs.
Under public international law, Israel is entitled to diligently encourage and promote close Jewish settlement of the land of Israel, thereby realizing the principles set out by the San Remo Treaty of 1920 and the League of Nations in the original Mandate document. In 1922 in violation of the treaty, the British gave away 80% of the land allocated to the Jewish people and gave it to the Arabs to set-up a state that never existed in history. (The British wanted to protect their oil interests). After WWI, The Allied powers set up 21 Arab states and one Jewish state in the Mandate for Palestine at the San Remo Treaty of 1920. There was no allocation of the Mandate for Palestine to any other people or nation, only the Jewish people.
In addition at that time, the Allied powers also allocated land for 21 Arab States and one Jewish State. If you questions Israel’s borders, you must question the 21 Arab States borders and Jordan. Therefore, you are not modifying any of the 21 Arab states and Jordan’s territory, you cannot modify Israel’s territory either. Only Israel via a treaty signed and executed by both parties with its neighbors can change the terms of the San Remo Treaty of 1920 confirmed by the 1920 Treaty of Sevres and Lausanne.

It is also important to address the expulsion of over a million Jewish families from the Arab countries and the confiscation of assets, businesses, homes and land owned by Jewish people in the Arab countries, totaling over 120,440 sq. km. (5 - 6 times the size of Israel) valued in the trillions of dollars.
The Jewish people resettled the million Jewish refugees from the Arab countries. It is about time the Arab countries who expelled the million Jewish people and confiscated their assets and land, must settle the Arab-Palestinian refugees once and for all without compromising Israel and bring about peace and tranquility to the region.
Neither the U.N. nor any Country in the world has the authority to create a state or dissolve a state, (check the U.N. charter and international law.)
A true peace will bring about an economic boom to the region of which the world has never seen before. It will raise the standard of living for all the people in the Middle East and accelerate peace and harmony.
It will also divert the billions of dollars invested in war materials to be used to advance the economy, medical and social services and more.
YJ Draiman

The failure to correctly argue against the false claim of ‘occupied’ has led to enormous damage being done to Israel - YJ Draiman

The failure to correctly argue against the false claim of ‘occupied’ has led to enormous damage being done to Israel. The word ‘occupied’ by itself tells a story that is very negative to Israel. It is a story that we have been trying to counter by the use of many words in long winded explanations, when and where the situation allows, and most people can’t be bothered to listen.
The Arabs understand the power of the word ‘occupied’ as witnessed by their immediate massive and unified response to the Australian Government’s announcement that they would not use the word ‘occupied’ because it was prejudicial when negotiations are ongoing.
I believe that it is not too late to succinctly argue the correct situation by using the word ‘liberated’ i.e. ‘liberated East Jerusalem’, and ‘liberated Territories’. These areas were not ‘occupied’ by Israel in 1967, Israel liberated them from Jordanian occupation. Jordan occupied these areas when it launched an unprovoked war against Israel on the day of its birth in 1948.
After more than four decades of propaganda stating the opposite, the correct version of the situation needs some explanation, and so a quick review of the history is in order.
On the 14 May 1948 with Britain’s Mandate over Palestine about to end at midnight, the Jews of Palestine declared that Israel would come into existence at one minute past midnight. Remember that Britain had been entrusted by the League of Nations to administer the Mandate which was for the purpose of “the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people”. The terms of the Mandate were never altered by the League of Nations nor by the United Nations after it assumed the responsibilities of the League of Nations. When Britain ended its administration of the Mandate and the Jews announced the subsequent formation of a Jewish State, the purpose of the Mandate was fulfilled.
Surrounding Palestine, were four Arab States with established borders. At dawn on 15 May, just hours after Israel came into existence, all the neighboring Arab States’ armies crossed their respective borders and launched unprovoked attacks on the new-born State. The Jordanian army crossed its border and occupied large parts of the newly created Israel including East Jerusalem. The fledgling Israel was not strong enough to expel the invaders and in 1949 armistice agreements were signed halting the ongoing fighting.
The expiry of the Mandate and the creation of Israel did not impact the borders of any neighbor, their borders did not change. When Jordan invaded Israel in an unprovoked attack at dawn on the 15th May, they captured and occupied territory that was not theirs. To whom did the territory belong? They belonged to the only State that existed beyond their borders at that time, Israel. Nearly a year after its unprovoked attack and invasion, an Armistice agreement with Jordan was reached. The cease fire lines were designated as the Armistice Demarcation Lines in the Armistice Agreement. “The basic purpose of the Armistice Demarcation Lines is to delineate the lines beyond which the armed forces of the respective Parties shall not move.” (Article IV(2) of the Agreement).
The territory Jordan conquered remained under Jordanian control until 1967 when it again launched an unprovoked attack on Israel. This time however Israel was not only strong enough to repel the attack but it was strong enough to expel the Jordanians from all the territory they had previously conquered and thus Israel was able to liberate all the previously occupied territories including East Jerusalem.
These territories that Israel liberated from Jordanian occupation in 1967 are what the Arab nations, and after four and a half decades of propaganda, the whole world, calls ‘occupied territories’. They are in fact liberated territories.
East Jerusalem was not ‘occupied’ by Israel in 1967 any more than Paris was ‘occupied’ by the French and the allies in the 2nd world war. Both Paris and Jerusalem were liberated from enemy occupation. Israel liberated East Jerusalem from Jordanian occupation in the same way the allies liberated Paris from German occupation. Israel was not in control of East Jerusalem prior to 1967 because Jordan launched an unprovoked attack on Israel (with the stated aim of wiping Israel off the map) and at that stage was stronger than Israel.
‘Liberated’ is another story in a word, and it is the story of what actually happened, not a lie.
When in 1967 Israel ejected the Jordanians from the territories they had occupied for 19 years, both it and its supporters failed to continually refer to the newly liberated territories as ‘liberated’. This has aided the Arabs in setting the narrative agenda.
I suggest therefore that where appropriate whenever the words East Jerusalem and ‘Territories’ are used, we should use the adjective ‘liberated’ to describe them. With the use of this one little word, hopefully we can retell the story of what happened as it really happened. We can help correct the lies and deceptions of the false narrative.
We are trying to correct the record more than four and a half decades late, after more than four and a half decades of propaganda, but perhaps if enough people use the word ‘liberate’ often enough it will somewhat neutralize the current narrative. It is only a little thing but let us hope it is not too little too late.

“We are tired of hearing anything from anyone associated with the U.N. The U.N. is a parasitic and criminal enterprise dominated by our mortal enemies. The U.N. cannot create states, it can only recommend and so can other nations only recommend and not create a state that never existed before in history.” Israel was reinstituted in its historical land and other Arab State were legally assigned their territory under International treaties and laws agreed to by the Allied powers after WW1 after the Ottoman Empire ceded its ownership to the Allied powers.

There is nothing to negotiate or talk about. Any Arab-Palestinian that does not want to live under Israel's government and obey the laws must transfer to Jordan or to the 75,000 sq, miles, the land the Arab countries confiscated from the million persecuted and expelled Jewish families. Negotiations are over, there is nothing to negotiate, the Arabs who live in Israel must comply and adhere to the laws of Israel or leave the country permanently.

Judea and Samaria is Jewish territory - No annexation is required for Greater Israel territory..
Let me pose an interesting scenario. If you had a country and it was conquered by foreign powers over a period of time. After many years you have taken back you country and land in various defensive wars. Do you have to officially annex those territories. It was always your territory and by retaking control and possession of your territory it is again your original property and there is no need to annex it. The title to your property is valid today as it was many years before.
Annexation only applies when you are taking over territory that was never yours to begin with, just like some European countries annexed territories of other countries.

The misstatement in the Proclamation of Independence that the State of Israel relied “on the strength” of the Partition Resolution for its legal establishment is false

There is a widespread misconception current also among Israel’s government leaders and media, that the State of Israel derives its legal existence from the United Nations General Assembly Resolution 181 (II) of November 29, 1947, popularly known as the “Partition Resolution.” This misconception is so ingrained in official historical, political and popular thinking, that it is extremely difficult to change, regardless of the overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

One major reason for this is that Israel’s own Proclamation of Independence perpetuates the wrongful notion that it was “on the strength of the Resolution of the United Nations General Assembly” that the members of what in the Proclamation itself was called “the People’s Council” relied in declaring the establishment of the State of Israel on May 14, 1948. Other reasons cited in the Proclamation were “our natural and historic right”. It was further stated there that “the State of Israel will cooperate with the UN in implementing the resolution of the General Assembly of the 29th November, 1947, and will take steps to bring about the economic union of the whole of Eretz-Israel.

The misstatement in the Proclamation of Independence that the State of Israel relied “on the strength” of the Partition Resolution for its legal establishment is false and conceals or actually suppresses the fact that Israel’s legal foundation under international law derives not from the 1947 Partition Resolution, which was merely a non-binding recommendation without any force of law, as the General Assembly of the U.N. is not a legislative body, but rather from the San Remo Resolution of April 25, 1920, issued by the Supreme Allied Council, who possessed the full legal right of disposition over the lands of the former Ottoman Empire. The San Remo Resolution did have the force of law upon its being incorporated first in the Treaty of Sevres of August 10, 1920 - Treaty of Lausanne and then in the first three recitals of the Preamble of the Mandate for Palestine, that was confirmed by the 52 states, all members of the League of Nations, in 1922 and separately by the United States in a 1924 treaty with the United Kingdom:-The Anglo-American Convention.

Furthermore Article 80 of the UN Charter, once known unofficially as the Jewish People’s clause, which preserves intact all the rights granted to Jews under the Mandate for Palestine, even after the Mandate’s expiry on May 14-15, 1948.

Under this provision of international law (the Charter is an international treaty), Jewish rights to Palestine and the Land of Israel were not to be altered in any way unless there had been an intervening trusteeship agreement between the states or parties concerned, which would have converted the Mandate into a trusteeship or trust territory. The only period of time such an agreement could have been concluded under Chapter 12 of the UN Charter was during the three-year period from October 24, 1945, the date the Charter entered into force after appropriate ratifications, until May 14-15, 1948, the date the Mandate expired and the State of Israel was proclaimed. Since no agreement of this type was made during this relevant three-year period, in which Jewish rights to all of Palestine may conceivably have been altered had Palestine been converted into a trust territory, those Jewish rights that had existed under the Mandate remained in full force and effect, to which the UN is still committed by Article 80 to uphold, and or is prohibited from altering.

Judea and Samaria – once and forever part of Israel, indivisible from the rest of the state - YJ Draiman

Judea and Samaria – once and forever part of Israel, indivisible from the rest of the state

The Arabs in Israel-Palestine always attacked the Jews - since the early 1600

Pre-State Israel: Arab Riots in Sefad 1600's and of the 1920's and 1930's etc.

It is time to stop it after over 400 years of attacks by the Arabs.

At the end of World War I, discussions commenced on the future of the Middle East, after the Ottoman Empire abandoned its claim to the territories, including the disposition of Palestine.
On April 19, 1920, the Allies, Britain, France, Italy and Greece, Japan and Belgium, convened in San Remo, Italy to discuss a peace treaty with Turkey.
The Allies decided to assign Great Britain the mandate over Palestine on both sides of the Jordan River, and the responsibility for putting the 1917 Balfour Declaration into effect, which made it part of international treaty and law. Arab nationalists were unsure how best to react to British authority. The two preeminent Jerusalem clans, the el-Husseinis and the Nashashibis, battled for influence throughout the mandate, as they had for decades before. The former was very anti-British, whereas the latter favored a more conciliatory policy.

One of the el-Husseinis, Haj Amin, who emerged as the leading figure in Palestinian politics during the mandate period, first began to organize small groups of suicide groups, Fadayeen (“one who sacrifices himself”), to terrorize Jews in 1919 in the hope of duplicating the success of Kemal in Turkey and drive the Jews out of Palestine, just as the Turkish nationalists were driving the Greeks from Turkey. The first large Arab riots took place in Jerusalem in the intermediary days of Passover, April 1920. The Jewish community had anticipated the Arab reaction to the Allies’ convention, and was ready to meet it.                                                                    Jewish affairs in Palestine were then being administered from Jerusalem by the Vaad Hatzirim (Council of Delegates), appointed by the World Zionist Organization (WZO) (which became the Jewish Agency in 1929). The Vaad Hatzirim charged Ze’ev (Vladimir) Jabotinsky with the task of organizing Jewish self-defense. Jabotinsky was one of the founders of the Jewish battalions, which had served in the British Army during the First World War and had participated in the conquest of Palestine from the Turks. Acting under the auspices of the Vaad Hatzirim, Jabotinsky lead the Haganah (self-defense) organization in Jerusalem, which succeeded in repelling the Arab attack. Six Jews were killed and some 200 injured in Jerusalem in the course of the 1920 riots. In addition, two Americans, Jakov Tucker and Ze’ev Scharff, both WWI veterans, were killed resisting an Arab attack on the Jewish settlement of Tel Hai in March 1920. Had it not been for the preliminary organization of Jewish defense, the number of victims would have undoubtedly been much greater.

After the riots, the British arrested both Arabs and Jews.
Among those arrested was Jabotinsky, together with 19 of his associates, on a charge of illegal possession of weapons. Jabotinsky was sentenced to 15 years imprisonment with hard labor and deportation from the country after completion of his sentence. When the sentence became known, the Vaad Hatzirim made plans for widespread protests, including mass demonstrations and a national fast.
Meanwhile, however, the mandate for Palestine had been assigned to Great Britain as a trustee for the Jewish people to implement the reestablishment of the Jewish State, and the jubilation of the Yishuv outweighed the desire to protest against the harsh sentence imposed on Jabotinsky and his comrades.

With the arrival in Jerusalem of the first High Commissioner, Sir Herbert Samuel, British military government was superseded by a civilian administration. As a gesture toward the civilian population, the High Commissioner proclaimed a general amnesty for both Jews and Arabs who had been involved in the April 1920 riots. Jabotinsky and his comrades were released from prison to an enthusiastic welcome by the Yishuv, but Jabotinsky insisted that the sentence passed against them be revoked entirely, arguing that the defender should not be placed on trial with the aggressor. After months of struggle, the British War Office finally revoked the sentences.

In 1921, Haj Amin el-Husseini began to organize larger scale Fadayeen to terrorize Jews. Colonel Richard Meinertzhagen, former head of British military intelligence in Cairo, and later Chief Political Officer for Palestine and Syria, wrote in his diary that British officials “incline towards the exclusion of Zionism in Palestine.” In fact, the British encouraged the Arabs to attack the Jews. According to Meinertzhagen, Col. Waters Taylor, financial adviser to the Military Administration in Palestine 1919-23, met with Haj Amin a few days before Easter, in 1920, and told him “he had a great opportunity at Easter to show the world...that Zionism was unpopular not only with the Palestine Administration but in Whitehall and if disturbances of sufficient violence occurred in Jerusalem at Easter, both General Bols [Chief Administrator in Palestine, 1919-20] and General Allenby [Commander of Egyptian Force, 1917-19, then High Commissioner of Egypt] would advocate the abandonment of the Jewish Home. Waters-Taylor explained that freedom could only be attained through violence.”

Haj Amin took the Colonel’s advice and instigated a riot.
The British withdrew their troops and the Jewish police from Jerusalem, and the Arab mob attacked Jews and looted their shops. Due to Haj Amin’s overt role in instigating the pogrom, the British arrested him. Yet, despite the arrest, Haj Amin escaped to Jordan, but he was sentenced to 10 years imprisonment in absentia. A year later, however, British Arabists convinced High Commissioner Herbert Samuel to pardon Haj Amin and to appoint him Mufti.

Samuel met with Haj Amin on April 11, 1921, and was assured “that the influences of his family and himself would be devoted to tranquility.” Three weeks later, however, riots in Jaffa and Petach Tikva, instigated by the Mufti, left 43 Jews dead. Following these riots England established the Haycraft Commission to evaluate the cause of these riots. The appendix of the report reads, “The fundamental cause of the Jaffa riots and the subsequent acts of violence was a feeling among the Arabs of discontent with, and hostility to, the Jews, due to political and economic causes, and connected with Jewish immigration, and with their conception of Zionist policy as derived from Jewish exponents . . . the Arab majority, who were generally the aggressors, inflicted most of the casualties.”

Following these riots, Haj Amin consolidated his power and took control of all Muslim religious funds in Palestine.
He used his authority to gain control over the mosques, the schools and the courts. No Arab could reach an influential position without being loyal to the Mufti. As the “Palestinian” spokesman, Haj Amin wrote to Colonial Secretary Winston Churchill in 1921, demanding that restrictions be placed on Jewish immigration and that Palestine be reunited with Syria and Transjordan. Churchill issued the White Paper of 1922, which tried to allay Arab fears about the Balfour Declaration. The White Paper acknowledged the need for Jewish immigration to enable the Jewish community to grow, but placed the familiar limit of the country's absorptive capacity on immigration. Although not pleased with Churchill’s diplomatic Paper, the Zionists accepted it; the Arabs, however, rejected it.

Despite the disturbances in 1920-1921, the Yishuv continued to develop in relative peace and security. Another wave of riots, however, broke out in 1924 after another wave of pogrom’s sent 67,000 Polish Jewish refugees to Palestine. After a week of skirmishes in Jerusalem between the Haganah and Arab mobs, 133 Jews and 116 Arabs lay dead. The yeshiva's main concern at that time was its financial difficulties; the economic crisis of 1926-1928 led many to believe that the Zionist enterprise would fail due to lack of funds. Zionist leaders attempted to rectify the situation by expanding the Jewish Agency to incorporate non-Zionists who were willing to contribute to the practical settlement of Palestine.

The prospects for renewed financial support for the Yishuv upset Arab leaders who feared economic domination by the Zionists. Led by Haj Amin al-Husseini once again, rumors of a Jewish plot to seize control of Muslim holy places began to spread. Violence erupted soon after, causing extensive damage. Rioting and looting were rampant throughout Palestine. In Jerusalem, Muslims provoked the violence and tensions by building and praying on or near the holiest place in the world for Jews, the Western Wall. By late August, the Arabs, in well organized formation, attacked Jewish settlements near Jerusalem. The disturbances spread to Hebron and Tsfat, including many settlements in between, and on the Kfar Dorom kibbutz in the Gaza Strip. After six days of rioting, the British finally brought in troops to quell the disturbance. Despite the fact that Jews had been living in Gaza and Hebron for centuries, following these riots, the British forced Jews to leave their homes and prohibited Jews from living in the Gaza strip and Hebron in an attempt to appease Arabs and quell violence. By the end of the rioting, 135 Jews (including eight Americans) were killed, with more than 300 wounded.

Like the riots earlier in the decade, afterward the British appointed Sir William Shaw to head an inquiry into the causes of the riots. The Shaw Commission found that the violence occurred due to “racial animosity on the part of the Arabs, consequent upon the disappointment of their political and national aspirations and fear for their economic future.” The report claimed that the Arabs feared economic domination by a group who seemed to have, from their perspective, unlimited funding from abroad. The Commission reported that the conflict stemmed from different interpretations of British promises to both Arabs and Jews. The Commission acknowledged the ambiguity of former British statements and recommended that the government clearly define its intentions for Palestine. It also recommended that the issue of further Jewish immigration be more carefully considered to avoid “a repetition of the excessive immigration of 1925 and 1926.” The issue of land tenure would only be eligible for review if new methods of cultivation stimulated considerable growth of the agricultural sector. The Shaw Commission frustrated Zionists, but the two subsequent reports issued on the future of Palestine were more disturbing. The Hope Simpson report of 1930 painted an unrealistic picture of the economic capacity of the country. It cast doubt on the prospect of industrialization and incorrectly asserted that no more than 20,000 families could be accommodated by the land. The Hope Simpson report was overshadowed, however, by the simultaneous release of the Passfield White Paper, which reflected colonial Secretary Passfield’s deep-seated animus toward Zionism.
This report asserted that Britain’s obligations to the Arabs were very weighty and should not be overlooked to satisfy Jewish interests. Many argued that the Passfield Paper overturned the Balfour Declaration, essentially saying that Britain should not plan to establish a Jewish state. The Passfield Paper greatly upset Jews, and interestingly, also the labor and conservative parties in the British Parliament. The result of this widespread outcry to the Secretary’s report was a letter from British Prime Minister MacDonald to Dr. Chaim Weitzman, reaffirming the commitment to create a Jewish homeland in Palestine.

The Arabs found rioting to be a very effective political tool because the British attitude toward violence against Jews, and their response to the riots, encouraged more outbreaks of violence. In each riot, the British would make little or no effort to prevent the Arabs from attacking the Jews. After each incident, a commission of inquiry would try to establish the cause of the riot. The conclusions were always the same: the Arabs were afraid of being displaced by Jewish immigrants. To stop the disturbances, the commissions routinely recommended that restrictions be made on Jewish immigration. Thus, the Arabs came to recognize that they could always stop Jewish immigration by staging a riot. Despite the restrictions placed on its growth, the Jewish population increased to more than 160,000 by the 1930s, and the community became solidly entrenched in Palestine.
Unfortunately, as the Jewish presence grew stronger, so did the Arab opposition. The riots brought recognition from the international Jewish community to the struggle of the settlers in Palestine, and more than $600,000 was raised for an emergency fund that was used to finance the cost of restoring destroyed or damaged homes, establish schools, and build nurseries.

Against this hostile environment the Jewish community in Palestine kept on growing. When Hitler took power in Germany, some of the Jews saw the handwriting on the wall, based on the post WWI International treaty granting the Jewish people the right to reestablish their own state in Palestine and decided it is time to immigrate to Israel and save their family from an oncoming catastrophe. While Hitler conquered Poland in 1939 and the Jews were led to extermination camps. Various Jews and Jewish organization were helping Jews escape death by going to Palestine-Israel. The British who were in charge of resettling Palestine with the Jewish people and reestablishing a Jewish state according to the mandated international treaty, reneged on their duty and obligation.

In 1939 due to Arab pressure and the desire to control natural resources in the Arab countries especially oil. The British authority in Palestine instituted new regulation which severely restricted Jewish immigration, in violation of the Mandate and at a time when millions of Jews were trying to escape Nazi extermination camps. The British turned back refugee ships to be exterminated. Later on the British went as far as blowing-up Jewish refugee ships destined for Palestine, known as "Operation Embarrass". The consequences of these action by the British caused the death of millions of Jews. "The British have Jewish blood on their hands". The British authorities in Palestine also committed heinous torture and atrocities against Jewish prisoners that was comparable if not worse that the German torture of Jews.

This set the stage of Jewish resistance to British illegal actions in Palestine that promoted various Jewish organization within Palestine to promote and bring about the termination of the British control of Palestine. In 1947, after numerous disastrous setbacks for the British authorities in Palestine. The British government notified the U.N. that they are living Palestine. Shortly thereafter, the U.N. voted that the Jewish population had attained sufficient number to govern itself as required by international treaties and the mandate for Palestine, therefore voted for the reestablishment of the Jewish State. In May 14, 1948, Israel declared its Independence. Immediately the surrounding Arab countries and their massive armies declared a war of annihilation against the Jews and attacked the newly reestablish fledging Jewish State. With the help of the almighty, the young Jewish nation survived the onslaught and continued to grow and prosper. Since 1948, Israel had to endure 4 wars by a neighboring hostile Arab armies. Israel has proposed numerous times that it is willing to trade land for peace in order to bring about peace and tranquility to its population. Israel has allowed the Arabs to control some of the territories in Judea and Samaria, Israel also ceded control of the Gaza Strip to the Arabs, this brought about instead of peace, thousand of rockets launched at Israel's population centers. But peace and coexistence have seemed to elude Israel, no matter what concession and appeasement it makes.  

It is time to look for other avenues and bring about peace and tranquility to the population of Israel.