How could Btselem get all these lies onto an accredited news site???? The Btselem org speaks as if they make the law and define it while they twist and prevert it. There is no international law that says we cannot annex the west bank to Israel. There is no sovreign entity claiming it to be their land and Jordan as well as Egypt have officially rescinded their claims on Gaza and the West Bank. The land in the WB is territory that Israel chose the leave ownerless and remains that way for wtvr reason. The Levy report clearly shows all of the legal standing of Jewish building in the WB and explains in depth what the international law says in this regard. Just as we annexed Jerusalem we have every right to annex all of the rest of the land of Israel seeing as there is no other entity that even claims this land as their own. The main issue is what to do about citizenship for the arabs that live there. This is the ONLY reason Israel hasn't done it yet.

I AGREE WITH YOU 100%. INTERNATIONAL LAW/THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY SHOULD BE (MORE) NEUTRAL, IMPARTIAL, OBJECTIVE TOWARDS ISRAEL INSTEAD OF TAKING SIDES.

If one party is to be held to international law then the other party to the conflict must as well. Suicide bombings, terroist attacks on schools and olympic athletes are all violations of Israeli civil rights and international law. Once the contract is breached international law is void. Oslo has also clearly been breached by the unilateral moves of Abbas. Israel cant be restrained by Palestinian intransigence.

This is an arab propaganda term that only came into after 1967.

I hear international law bandied about a great deal but no one is specific about which international law Israel is breaking, As far as I am aware Jordan annexed the west bank in 1950 and gave all ithe arabs in the area Jordanian citizenship this was recognised by the UK. During the Oslo accords Jordan relinquished the west bank, so who is occupying who? and why are Jordanian citizens in the west bank calling themselves refugees? They have a home east of the Jordan river.

Jews are also "local population". And 67' borders aren't dependable. Ask any military official, many if not most of the settlements serve military purposes.

no E1, Jerusalem or even the Jewish people are mentioned in the first chapters of bereschit, but a story started which did not end until now. Stay cool and be aware of future events!

Samaria and Judea never belonged to the "Palestinians"!!!! They just occupy the Land. Its our Land and Will stay that way. Aaron de Haas

For this women, Jews have no rights, certainly no human rights.

Your entree tretise is based on the assumption that inhabitants of a land are the owners. This is not true. Sovereign nations only can be owners of land. There is no soveregin owner of this land and thus it is not occupied land.

It is not surprising to me that Ms Leedor quoted not a single source for her assumption that building in the E-1 zone would be "clearly" illegal. In fact, given the absence of ANY sovereign over the territory of the Judea and Samaria, and given the expulsions of Israelis (Jews) from the territory after the 1948 war, Israel has as good a claim to the entire territory as any other entity, especially one that did not exist in 1967. And let's not forget the Armistice Agreements EACH specified the 1949 lines were NOT final borders. I look forward to a discussion with Ms Leedor, but one that is fact and law based.

they are 'mentioned'. In fact the story is of the Jews. Go on and read the other five books, not to mention Prophets and Writings. You might find them interesting.

....the Mandate for Palestine can only be altered with Israel's permission.Article 80 of the UN's Charter makes that clear. That means that Israel has a right to settle Jews ANYWHERE in the Palestine Mandate territory unless it agrees to a change itself,and why would it? International Law is on ISRAEL'S.The problem is that Law which favours Israel is disregarded by those who don't like it. THREE CHEERS FOR ISRAEL!!!

Indeed, eventually we should have a demilitarized, peaceful Palestinian state coexisting next to Israel, and accepting Israel's right to exist. But whoever said the 1967 borders are the basis for it, and that Israel has no right to all of the West Bank? The WB in the 1967 borders has nothing to do with the Palestinians. This territory was taken from Jordan in a course of a defensive war, and many areas inside it have never had any Palestinian (or Arab, since "Palestinian" is a recently made-up term) population in it. A good example is the northern Dead Sea. Exactly what history do the Palestinians have over there? Instead of invoking some nebulous "international law" to ream Israel with, the writer should try and learn basic history of the region.

Should read "Op-Truth" or "Op-Intelligence" because nothing was correct. Can't name the law I bet

the league of nation was a western tool, implemented by western countries, for western purposes. no state in the world recognizes israel beyond the green line. or the rest is just wishful thinking or a selective use of religion (the same that push some people to ask for 'judea and samaria', without giving back the coastal plan between ashdod and ashekelon, never ever 'israelite)

Yes she can build legally on E1. See my post#1. Even if the league was a western tool, the fact is that paragraph 80 of the UN charter accepted all the leagues mandates, so did the International Court of Justice. If the world wants to test this, they can try to take it again to the court, but they won't because they know they would lose.

Yes HE does Stan - I have witnessed some amazing miracles. I could relate some that Israel were given during the wars fought for her very existance. . Unfortunately there is much lack of belief in some Israelis but that will change in HIS time. HE who scattered you has brought you back to your cherished land just as you were told. Extremely hard and difficult times now and ahead but in the end HE and HE alone will protect you. Those who love you and the true Christians (not the boycotters) who truly care will continue to pray for you.

The law of the League of Nations' Palestine Mandate to Britain, not the Geneva Conventions regarding occupied territory of "another signatory state," govern the Schtachim. Yes, B'tslem is mis-interpreting Geneva. Yehuda and Shomron are not "occupied territory" since there was never a "signatory state" of Palestine with sovereignty over that territory. Upon the breakup of the Ottoman Empire after WW One, Britan was given control of the geographic region then known as Palestine, in trust, for the purpose of encouraging Jewish immigration to _the_whole_ of that territory in anticipation of eventual creation of a Jewish state. The 1947 UN partition resolution authorized creation of a Jewish state as well as creation of an Arab state, side-by-side in the remaining portion of the British mandate territory (Britain having given away some 70% of their original mandate to create the _first_ Palestinian Arab state, Jordan, long before). Jews accepted the plan, Arabs didn't, and war ensued, with an armistice in 1948 but NO peace treaty, ever, to date. The "green line" is not an internationally recognized border but simply the lines held by the opposing forces when they temporarily quit fighting in 1948. Jordan attempted to annex the West Bank in 1949 but few if any nations recognized the legitimacy of such a claim. The Arabs who had never made peace with Israel prepared to re-attack in 1967, and again lost to the defender Israel, losing more territory, including the rest of the original Mandate. Resolution 242 calls for both sides to negotiate final status of the DISPUTED, not occupied, territories and, in the meantime, after the Oslo Accords gave the PA direct autonomy over most of the disputed areas, Israel was granted full zoning and building authority in the Area C parts of the disputed territories over which Israel retained direct authority. That's all, in a nutshell. There's nothing illegal about building houses on physically unoccupied State land whose current legal owner is the State of Israel.

Jordan's creation was a western tool, implemented by western countries, for western purposes. The fiction of "Palestine" is a Muslim tool, implemented by Muslim countries, for Muslim purposes. Isn't it strange that you don't say anything about either?

The impression is that you trying to imprision the people in their own homes. Look to me that you trying to find the excusses to give up your indentity and decieve your own people in order to be political correctness . Don't think that is a fraud to pretend that you are B'Tselem probably your don't have even shade.

It would add some serious meaning to the opinion of the pundits if they would cite the actual adjudicated decision by which they claim the situation is in violation of. So far a I see nothing more than another opinionated pundit parroting nothing more than another unsubstantiated adjudicated personal position. Exactly what ruling has come from an official world bogy which validates your claims as being "illegal'?

To # 1 & all the rest of all of speakers in defence of our G-d given Land.-Hats off to you all,(G-d Bless). Shame on you-Miriam Leedor for the defamation of our Holy Land. Atleast learn from Mickey-Sydey, Australia.

Myriam Leedor doesn't know a lot about international law. E1 was jordanian territory?No, the annexion of cisjordan was never internationnaly recognised, because the frontier with Israel was not a "bilateral agreement. I say, and I will repeat it every day a cease fire line is not a peace treaty line, no more an armistice line. It's just a "de facto line" Just two arguments are good in this article:. -"State owned lands are meant for the use of the palestinians" The jews from Hevron had palestinian identity cards when expelled! Jews from Atarot are not less refugees than Arabs, jews from goush Etzion too... Second, she writes that building in E1 is possible if "necessary for military needs" It's the case for E1. . , The left built Maale Adumim, Maale Efraim , and...and..for military needs I's possible to discuss with Yachimowitz, I hope it. But not with leftistists psychopaths!.

The arab negotiators at the Rhodos ceasefire agreement 1949 expressly required that the ceasefire line should not be an internationally recognized border. Further to the jordanian annexation, only UK and Pakistan recognized the fait accompli. So the whole B'tselem baloney is a hoax, as it does not lean on any international law. The revanchist posturing of 1949 Arabs was a shot in their foot.

To Miriam the stupid Jewess: if you like international law so much, then go live somewhere internationally! Don't let the door hit your lying ass on the way out.

Mickey, Does Geneva Convention 1949 sounds familiar to you?