Benjamin Netanyahu UN Speech Full Text Transcript, Sep 24, 2009

I think you need a review of history before you say things without base. Netanhou emphasized how Israel left Gaza for peace 8 years ago, uprooting thousands of people from an area which is disputed territory** (see below) Israel didn't have any legal reason to leave except for wanting peace. What the UN doesn't want to understand is that this is what led to thousands of rockets being shot at Sderot and only after 8 years, of dealing with these rockets from Hamas, a government committing double war crimes: Firing at a civilian population and hiding behind a civilian population did Israel attack.  (Lets not forget they still held Shalit and were attempting hundreds of suicide bombings) On the eve of Yom Kippur it is frightening to watch Ajmidinijan get up at the UN say there was no Holocaust and say he wants to destroy Israel (Which has 6 million Jews today; scary number) and have so many UN members not only stay and listen but clap for him.   There has NEVER  been a resolution or a decision saying that the West Bank and Gaza belongs to the Palestinians. This is an example of Goebbels's premise that the more you repeat a lie the more people begin to believe it.  (an in this case the UN follows along.  If it is against Israel, the Un is for it.) This land is disputed both by Israel and the Palestinian Authority.  Yet the Palestinians keep saying it is "Occupied" territory so people begin to believe it, as with Goebbels.  Please read below for the facts.    Resolution 242 states "that Israel will not withdraw from all the territories." This with UN Security Council Resolution 338, state that only NEGOTIATIONS will determine which portion of these territories would eventually become "Israeli territories" or territories to be retained by the Palestinians. (These negotiations have NEVER taken place. The are too busy bombing and blowing us up while the UN condemns Israel and let's terrorists get away with murder) At the heart of the Palestinian (and those who wish Israel harm) diplomatic struggle against Israel is the repeated assertion that the Palestinians of the West Bank and Gaza Strip are "resisting occupation."   This language has of course been adapted by the United Nations.   **During August 2001, a Palestinian draft resolution at the UN Security Council repeated the commonly used Palestinian reference to the West Bank and Gaza Strip as "occupied Palestinian territories."   **References to Israel's "foreign occupation" also appeared in the Durban Draft Declaration of the UN World Conference Against Racism. The Libyan ambassador to the United Nations, in the name of the Arab Group Caucus, reiterated on October 1, 2001,    Three clear purposes seem to be served by the repeated references to "occupation" or "occupied Palestinian territories:   1. Palestinian spokesmen hope to create a political context to explain and even justify    the Palestinians' adoption of violence and terrorism during the current intifada.     2.  The OFFICIAL UN Security Council Resolution 242 states it is DISPUTED territory      to be discussed.  Nowhere in ANY document or resolution is this land named     occupied.  The Palestinians following Goebbels's Premise have ceaselessly used      this term.  Their demand of Israel to "end the occupation" DOES Not leave any           room for territorial compromise in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, as suggested         by the ORIGINAL language of UN Security Council Resolution 242    3.  The use of "occupied Palestinian territories" denies Israel claim to the land: if the      more accurate language of "disputed territories" is used, then the Palestinians       and Israel would be on an even playing field with equal rights, as it should be.       By presenting Israel as a "foreign occupier," advocates of the Palestinian cause       can delegitimize the Jewish historical attachment to Israel. (which is real and       documented.  Unlike the Palestinian claim that this land only belongs to them.)       This has become a focal point of Palestinian diplomatic efforts since the failed        2000 Camp David Summit, but particularly since the UN Durban Conference in 2001.     THE truth about the 1967 war that led to the disputed territories – NO SPIN, NO PROPAGANDA.  (The historical narrative.)    The 1949 Fourth Geneva Convention states that occupation is defined as a LEGITIMATE sovereign who was ousted.  This is not the case with the West Bank (or Gaza).   In fact, prior to 1967, Jordan had occupied the West Bank.  Their presence in the West Bank was the result of Jordan's illegal invasion in 1948, in defiance of the UN Security Council. Jordan's 1950 annexation of the West Bank was recognized only by Great Britain and Pakistan, and rejected by the vast majority of the international community, including the Arab states. Thus no internationally recognized sovereign control previously existed. So even according to the Geneva convention the West Bank cannot be considered  "Occupied."  Jordan was illegally there and there was no Palestinian country there.  (In fact, there has NEVER been a Palestinian country)   At Jordan's insistence, the 1949 Armistice Line, that constituted the Israeli-Jordanian boundary until 1967, was not a recognized international border but only a line separating armies. The Armistice Agreement specifically stated: "NO provision of this Agreement shall in any way PREJUDICE the rights, claims, and positions of EITHER Party hereto in the peaceful settlement of the Palestine questions, the provisions of this Agreement being dictated exclusively by military considerations" (emphasis added) (Article II.2)   The agenda based and politically-loaded term "occupied territories" seems to apply only to ISRAEL.  It is not used when other territorial disputes are discussed.   1.  U.S. Department of State refers to Kashmir as "DISPUTED areas."   2.  The State Department describes the part of Azerbaijan claimed as an independent      republic by indigenous Armenian separatists as "the DISPUTED area of       Nagorno-Karabakh."   3. The Persian Gulf island of Zubarah, claimed by both Qatar and Bahrain, was    described by the Court as "DISPUTED territory," until it was finally allocated to Qatar.   4.  The Moroccan military incursion in the former Spanish colony is never described     as "occupation."   5.  The Persian Gulf island of Zubarah, claimed by both Qatar and Bahrain, was      described by as "DISPUTED territory," until it was finally allocated to Qatar.   As noted above, in many other cases in recent history in which recognized international borders were crossed in armed conflicts and sovereign territory seized, the language of "occupation" was not used -- even in clear-cut cases of aggression. Yet in the case of the West Bank and Gaza, where no internationally recognized sovereign control previously existed, the stigma of Israel as an "occupier" has gained ACCEPTANCE.   Here the historical sequence of events on June 5, 1967:   Israel only entered the West Bank after repeated Jordanian artillery fire and ground movements across the previous armistice lines. Jordanian attacks began at 10:00 a.m.; an Israeli warning to Jordan was passed through the UN at 11:00 a.m.; Jordanian attacks nonetheless persisted, so that Israeli military action only began at 12:45 p.m. Additionally, Iraqi forces had crossed Jordanian territory and were poised to enter the West Bank. Under such circumstances, the temporary armistice boundaries of 1949 lost all validity the moment Jordanian forces revoked the armistice and attacked. Israel thus took control of the West Bank as a result of a defensive war.   Under UN Security Council Resolution 242 from November 22, 1967 -- that has served as the basis of the 1991 Madrid Conference and the 1993 Declaration of Principles -- Israel is only expected to withdraw "from territories" to "secure and recognized boundaries" and not from "the territories" or "all the territories" captured in the Six-Day War. This deliberate language resulted from months of painstaking diplomacy. For example, the Soviet Union attempted to introduce the word "all" before the word "territories" in the British draft resolution that became Resolution 242.  Lord Caradon, the British UN ambassador, resisted these efforts. Since the Soviets tried to add the language of full withdrawal but failed, there is no ambiguity about the meaning of the withdrawal clause contained in Resolution 242, which was unanimously adopted by the UN Security Council.   Thus, the UN Security Council recognized that Israel was entitled to part of these territories for new defensible borders. Britain's foreign secretary in 1967, stated three years later that the meaning of Resolution 242 was "that Israel will not withdraw from all the territories." Taken together with UN Security Council Resolution 338, it became clear that only negotiations would determine which portion of these territories would eventually become "Israeli territories" or territories to be retained by Israel's Arab counterpart.   The last international legal allocation of territory that includes what is today the West Bank and Gaza Strip occurred with the 1922 League of Nations Mandate for Palestine, which recognized Jewish national rights in the whole of the Mandated territory: "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." The members of the League of Nations did not create the rights of the Jewish people, but rather recognized a pre-existing right, that had been expressed by the 2,000-year-old quest of the Jewish people to re-establish their homeland.   Moreover, Israel's rights were preserved under the United Nations as well, according to Article 80 of the UN Charter, despite the termination of the League of Nations in 1946. Article 80 established that nothing in the UN Charter should be "construed to alter in any manner the rights whatsoever of any states or any peoples or the terms of existing international instruments." These rights were unaffected by UN General Assembly Resolution 181 of November 1947 -- the Partition Plan -- which was a non-binding recommendation that was rejected, in any case, by the Palestinians and the Arab states.   Given these fundamental sources of international legality, Israel possesses legal and historical rights with respect to the West Bank that appear to be ignored by those international observers who repeat the term "occupied territories" without any awareness of Israeli territorial claims. Even if Israel only seeks "secure boundaries" that cover part of the West Bank there is a world of difference between a situation in which Israel approaches the international community as a "foreign occupier" with no territorial rights, and one in which Israel has strong historical rights to the land that were recognized by the main bodies serving as the source of international legitimacy in the previous century.    Adapted from www.jcpa.org/jl/vp470.htm

No no no, you my friend need to read up on your facts. Firstly, I'd like to know if you have ever even been to the region, because I have quite a few times. Hamas and Hezbolla, both TERRORIST orginizations have been threatening the existence of Israel as whole, and these radical Palestians have even declared their blatant mission, to push the Jewish people into the sea. To exterminate them. Hamas has continiuosly been showing this with the thousands of rockets being sent into Sderot and all of Israel. Yes, you are right that only 11 Israelis had died prior to the operation in Gaza this past Winter, but these Israelis live in fear. Almost 90% have post-tramatic stress disorder. If you walk in the streets of this city, you will see bom shelters in every corner of every building; but most importany, you will see the people. So many have twitches, or yell quite frequently, in direct affiliation with the stress these attacks everyday put on them. But besides this, you claim that Israel has illegal settlements on Palestinian land: this is a fallacy. Israel had legitimate settlements in the Gaza strip area, but in an agreement for PEACE ordered of a massive evacuation. Israelis had to leave their homes for the sake of a safer reciprical agreement. Months and even days later, the Palestinian authorities living in the area began sending heaps of rockets to Israel. What does this show? Well it is not a new phenomenon. After the complete withdrawal of Israeli troops in the Lebanese area, Hezbolla continued to fight Israel, although it had already claimed its only goal was to force Israel off Lebanese territory. There is a common theme here, and it is the lies of these palastinean leaders, and the violation of human rights they make. Now think of the accusations against Israel for breaking human rights. EVERY DAY, Hamas sends people to death row, for merely dancing at a wedding, singing, or speaking out. In Gaza, Hamas sets up their rockets in mosques and schools, so that when Israel attacks, they either choose not to act or choose to take these launching sights out by also and unintentionally killing civilians. So, who really is breaking these human rights. Now go to the area, go to Gaza, go to Israek, and tell me what you think you moron

Americans...WAKE THE HELL UP! The Israelis are our only friends in the middle east. They are surrounded by people who hate them as much as they hate Americans.We must support them, help them expand and permenatley wipe out these muslims who hate us and bring death to our shores.The clock is ticking people If we sit on our hands and do nothing to help our friends and allies, the state of Israel, then we too will experience a holocaust in the form of a dirty bomb which will kill hundreds of thousands of American lives.

Oren; your name states that you maybe Israeli or Morrocan or both. Everything Nentanyahu has stated is fact. Yes, he did not mention the settlements which I am opposed of. As for white phosphorous, etc..."All is fair in love and war" Wars and conflicts with failed diplomacy is meant to be won. I truly believe that you have no belief that Israel intentionally bombed UN outposts school's, etc..You are only using that to force your argument with the grace of an Arab dictator. Apartheid you say!!!! The wall which Israel has constructed has almost completely halted suicide bombers from infiltrating populated area's. Also, let's not forget that Hamas is a democratically elected political party voted in by the Palestinian people. We (Americans) had to live with 8 years of dumbass Bush. We are certainly paying that price and will for years to come. You do not lend comfort to a people that voted in a so called political party who calls for your destruction. Don't be naive. You sound like Neville Chamberlain. As far as the rockets are concerned, the only reasons more Israeli's did not die, was that Israeli citizens are prepared for this sort of thing and the ineptness of the Hamas militia to properly strike. The only thing Hamas has produced is more dead Palestinians.

There are opinions and there is antisemitism.  If you are saying your opinion, because you hate Jews so it is not an opinion.  This means that you don't have respect to anyone .  You were not here in Israel when we got attacked for eight years. From your name you might be Jewish yourself and if I am correct you don't have where to go besides Israel should something happen.