Human catastrophe

You're just rewording "revoked citizenship" into a long twisted narrative that doesn't change the facts. Jordan lost that territory in a war, the same as Germany lost much of their land in a war. All of those ethnic Germans from Prussia, Silesia, Poland, all across the east, were welcomed home to Germany after the war despite the massive destruction and poverty. When the Soviets walled off East Germany, the west still continued to welcome anyone who could get across.

Israel isn't walling anybody in - they can't go home to Jordan (or Egypt) because the Jordanians and Egyptians won't let their former citizens in.

On the other hand, those Arabs who stayed in Israel in 1948 are still there, as Israeli citizens, voting their own reps into the Knesset.

The difference is black and white. I wonder why you can't see that?

 

No, as it was only due to the continuous occupation of the West Bank, with the settlements and the restrictions on travel, that the Jordanian authorities were unable to facilitate services to Jordanians in the West Bank. They still held out for more than 20 years.

Those other prejudices existed prior to '67, but did not prevent the Jordanians from serving their citizens in the West Bank, post their formal annexation of this territory in '50 (actually already provided earlier than the formal annexation).

If you wanted to go back and show some other, older "root cause", you would have to show that it would lead to a similar consequence; but those other, subsidiary causes, cannot do so, as there is a myriad of other possibilities that wouldn't lead to Palestinians of the West Bank losing the ability to apply for Jordanian citizenship. Indeed, if you go in that direction, you could easily end up with a situation that they were never allowed it. Which is a another matter entirely.

 

I thought you were talking about the refugee problem but even if you are talking about just this part of it your position is flawed. The Israeli occupation of the West Bank was hardly an arbitrary project. It was a consequence of the wars between Israel and the Arab states. I guess Israel could have annexed the West Bank but that was thoroughly discouraged by the international community and occupation was enough to meet most of the defensive needs. So yes it does go back before the existance of Israel.

 

Then let them into Jordan! Give them their citizenship back. Is that point too subtle for you? Nobody is starving in the occupied territories and the only "restriction" is that you can't import arms. Oddly, West Bank and Gazans can and do enter Israel every day. People work in Israel and cross freely. However, they can't enter Jordan or Egypt. Weird, huh?

Every square inch of the planet is "occupied" by an entity who took it from another entity (who took it from somebody preceding them). Israel won, Jordan lost. Jordan should let their people come home, or as in all history, they should try and take it back.

The propaganda about it gets tiresome.

 

The only way Palestinians from the West Bank can access the rest of the world, is through Jordan. And that is only by standing in queues for hours at a time, to get through Israeli security.

Many first-time visitors are surprised to realize that they need to cross through Israeli checkpoints not only between Israel and the West Bank, but also within the West Bank.
http://ramallahhostel.com/west-bank-travel-tips/

Indeed, even if they hold US Citizenship, there are a myriad of difficulties:

U.S. passport holders are occasionally denied entry into Israel or the West Bank at one of the border crossings. They may also be subject to lengthy delays and security checks.
Entry into Israel and the West Bank is subject to the authority of the relevant border officials. U.S. citizens may contact the Consulate General to report cases involving denial of entry into the West Bank via the Allenby Bridge-King Hussein border crossing, though the Consulate cannot assume responsibility for facilitating U.S. citizens' passage into Israel or the West Bank.

U.S. Citizens with Palestinian Passports
U.S. citizens with Palestinian passports must use the Allenby Bridge-King Hussein border crossing to enter or exit the West Bank (and via the West Bank, Israel). They are not permitted to transit via Ben Gurion International Airport.
http://gaza.usvpp.gov/border-crossings.html

Another site:
Entering the West Bank: While travel to Bethlehem and Jericho is unrestricted for U.S. government personnel, the Department of State urges U.S. citizens to exercise caution when traveling to other parts of the West Bank. See the Travel Warning for Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza for the latest information concerning travel to the West Bank.

Israel-Jordan Crossings: The international crossing points between Israel and Jordan are the Arava crossing (Wadi al-'Arabah) in the south, near Eilat; and the Jordan River crossing (Sheikh Hussein Bridge) in the north, near Beit Shean. American citizens using these two crossing points need not obtain prior visas to enter either Israel or Jordan, but they will be required to pay entry fees, which are subject to change.

Allenby Bridge (King Hussein Bridge): The Government of Israel requires that Palestinian-Americans with residency status in the West Bank enter Jordan via the Allenby Bridge. For detailed information, please refer to the Consulate General's web site. U.S. passport holders require visas in advance to cross the Allenby Bridge between Jordan and the West Bank. Persons with residency status in Gaza seeking to cross the Allenby Bridge into Jordan should contact the Jordanian authorities for information concerning special clearance procedures for PA ID holders before traveling to the bridge. U.S. passport holders who also possess Israeli passports are prohibited from using the Allenby/King Hussein Bridge crossing, unless as part of an official delegation or with special permission from the Israeli authorities.

Procedures for all three crossings into Jordan are subject to frequent changes. Visit the Embassy of Israel web site for the most current visa information.
http://www.countryreports.org/travel/Israel/entry.htm

Now, if it's not the Israelis creating these hindances to travel, manning the borders as they do between Jordan and the West Bank, with "frequent changes", and travellers being urged to contact the Embassy of Israel to ascertain the most current information, then who?

 

They can travel to Jordan. That is my point, which you are still denying.

Have you actually tried to travel "freely" between the West Bank and Israel, with a Palestinian? Try it some time. Seeing as how it is all so "free".

There are restrictions, and then there are realities. Israel makes lame excuses to halt deliveries of goods and items to the West Bank sometimes indefinitely, well beyond armaments. Since when was basic telecom equipment "arms"? Since when do you justify delaying its delivery for years?

Your denial of the facts is tiresome. As opposed to you, I actually have some real experience in the West Bank.

 

So if France had fired rockets and sent suicide bombers into Spain. Spain would be unjustified in requiring lengthy security checks of Frenchmen trying to enter their country? Meanwhile Americans trying to cross the border should not be questioned because Americans are special and have never cause problems anywhere on the international scene.

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ferrari-sheppard/i-traveled-to-palestine_b_4761896.html

"The Israeli government controls everything in the country. This total control which is most magnified in the West Bank, concerns everything from where Palestinians are permitted to travel, to how much water they consume per month."

http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/1.657260

"Palestinian workers will now have to return from Israel to the West Bank via the same checkpoint they left and will not be allowed to ride Israeli bus lines.

The new regulations, implemented by the Civil Administration, could lengthen some workers' commutes by as much as two hours."

So much for "free".

From 1967 to 1972 the occupied Palestinian territory was declared a closed military area by the Israeli military and many freedoms including the freedom of movement by residents were severely limited. In 1972 the Israeli military issued a general exit order which allowed Palestinian to enter Israel from the West Bank and Gaza during daylight hours with few limitations. During this period Palestinians could also travel with relative freedom between the West Bank and Gaza.

Some limits were imposed on the general exit permit during the first Intifada, and following the start of the first Iraq war in 1991 the general exit permit was revoked and a general closure was declared over the occupied Palestinian territory. This was when Israel started requiring that all Palestinians acquire military issued permits if they wanted to enter Israel or move between the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and Gaza. This permit regime was formalized as a part of the Oslo Accords and Palestinian movement into and out of Israel and between the different parts of the occupied Palestinian territory remains restricted to those Palestinians who have received travel permits from the Israeli military.

The Oslo Accords also resulted in new limitations on movement within the occupied Palestinian territory. Under the Oslo Accords the West Bank was divided into three administrative areas (A,B, and C). Area C, which comprises 61 percent of the West Bank, is under the full control of Israel through the Civil (Military) Administration in the West Bank. Area B, 22% of the West Bank, is under the full administrative control of the Palestinian Authority but under the military control of Israel. Area A makes up 17% of the West Bank and is under full Palestinian control. Even before the start of the Second Intifada in September 2000 this division resulted in the imposition of movement restrictions between communities and between administrative areas inside the West Bank which were enforced through the imposition of mobile checkpoints.

After the start of the second intifada Israel intensified the general closure in place over the occupied Palestinian territory, more closely regulating travel by Palestinians and formalizing an internal system of movement restrictions through permanent checkpoints, roadblocks, gates, closed roads, barriers, and the Wall.

According to the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) the number of obstacles to movement inside the West Bank increased to 542 during 2013 from 529 in 2012. Approximately 100 of these obstacles are permanent staffed checkpoints and the others are roadblocks, gates, unmanned checkpoints, and other obstacles. Only 40 of these permanent checkpoints are a last inspection point before entry into Israel and most of these 40 checkpoints are located several kilometers inside the West Bank and not along the Green Line which is the internationally recognized demarcation line between the West Bank and Israel. Additionally, each month the Israeli military puts in place several hundred temporary checkpoints that change location from day to day and which are used to control Palestinian movement.

Most of the movement restrictions in the West Bank are put in places to specifically restrict Palestinian access to roads used by settlers or to areas near or controlled by settlements. While Palestinian movement is severely restricted, a separate system of roads that are closed to Palestinians or that bypass Palestinian communities has been set up for Settlers to ensure their unrestricted movement in the West Bank and between the West Bank and Israel.

OCHA has also reported that in 2013 at least 55 West Bank communities which are home to more than 180,000 people remain completely isolated as a result of roadblocks, barriers, checkpoints and other movement restrictions. All of the main roads into and out of these communities remain blocked and residents wishing to leave these communities must use alternative routes that are two to five times longer than the blocked direct routes. Many of these communities are located near the Wall, near settlements, or in the Jordan Valley.
https://afsc.org/resource/restricted-movement-occupied-palestinian-territory

And as if that wasn't bad enough...

Since 1967 over 14,000 Palestinians have had their residency rights in the city of Jerusalem revoked.According to Israeli law the residency right of Palestinian Jerusalemites can be revoked if they leave Israel for a period of 7 years, if they gain permanent residency status in another country, if they gain citizenship status in another country, if they are declared a threat to national security, or if their center of life (job, home, etc.) as defined by the Israeli government is not in the city. Students studying abroad, individuals who leave Israel to pursue work opportunities, and Jerusalemites who gain employment in the West Bank have all had their Permanent Resident status revoked. Losing Permanent Resident status means losing their right to visit or live in Jerusalem. These same restrictions do not apply to Jewish Israeli residents of Jerusalem.

"Free" apparently means something else to you, than it does to me.

Granted, tourism to Palestine still faces many challenges, not least the Israeli border authorities who control all routes into the West Bank.
http://www.theguardian.com/travel/2011/nov/18/10-highlights-palestine-ramallah-nablus

 

Drive within 100 miles of the Mexican border in the US and don't be surprised if you have to stop at checkpoints. And in some cases I'm talking 70, 80, 100 miles above the border. We do it because of drug smugglers, the Israelis do it because of arms smugglers. I live inside that zone and get stopped all the time. It's near a border, that's what happens.

At the same time, Arabs pass every day into Israel to work, shop, whatever. They get checked at the border. They may get checked inside the west bank itself. So what? I do as well. I have little sympathy.

I'm not denying that - they can't stay and work or open a business in Jordan because their citizenship has been revoked. Mexicans drive freely into the US, but can't stay because they are not citizens. I drive to Mexico frequently (I'm going tomorrow for dental work). I can't stay and work or open a business because I'm not a citizen.

 

Your analogy is hopelessly flawed;

1) Spain has not occupied France
2) Spain is not illegally building settlements on French territory.
3) The Palestinian National Authority as headed by currently Fatah (the governing body of the West Bank) is not sending rockets in Israel, nor is it sending suicide bombers. Indeed, it supports efforts to weed out the criminal elements that do. Including co-operating with the Israelis to some degree.

When was the last suicide bomber to come out of the West Bank?

Or are we suggesting that the Palestinian Authority's National Security Force, is incapable of providing anything more dangerous than a kitchen knife to the latest series of "terrorists"?

As the Israeli–Palestinian conflict goes on, the security forces notably co-operate with other law enforcement agencies, such as arresting militant sub-groups and assisting the Israeli government with prosecuting those picked up. According The Jerusalem Post as well, "In the past, Palestinian security forces have released arrested terrorists and then quietly tipped off Israel to mitigate internal public criticism against handing over Palestinians to Israel."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_National_Security_Forces

 

Hopelessly flawed. Is New Zealand is illegally building settlements on Maori territory? Is every other nation on earth (that were all taken by force from predecessors) illegally building settlements? No? Why?

I hate to suggest it again, but you are holding Jews to a different standard than any other ethnic group on earth. Why is that? Why?

 

1) You don't get checked by Mexican Police, on the US-side of the border.
2) US Police aren't putting up road blocks restricting Mexican travel inside Mexico.
3) You claim you don't have sympathy. Ok. But you aren't getting stopped anywhere near the frequency, nor duration, nor as intrusively. Try it and see.

And again, Palestinians that decide to leave the West Bank, can and do travel, work and reside elsewhere. Once again, this is what Israel wants them to do; the Israeli's encourage this, by making life as unbearable as the Israeli government possibly can given public scrutiny.

Jordanian's Law No. 6 of 1954 on Nationality (last amended 1987)
Article 12
Any person other than a Jordanian who is not incapable by law may apply to the Council of Ministers for grant of a certificate of Jordanian naturalization if:
(1) He has been regularly resident in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan for a period of four years preceding the date of his application;
(2) He intends to reside in the Hashemite Kingdom of the Jordan.

Residency for four years. That's it. Of course, if you're trying to maintain your right to the land in the West Bank you inherited, that's kind of difficult when living in Jordan...

And regarding your situation regarding Mexico; you'd be wrong:

According to the 2010 National Census, there are 961,121 immigrants registered with the government as living in Mexico, the majority of whom are US citizens.This is almost double the 492,617 foreign-born residents counted in the 2000 Census.

The largest number of Americans outside the United States live in Mexico. There even seems to be an unofficial amnesty on US retirees moving there...

Young Spaniards are getting work in Mexico. I'm sure US-citizens can too. Not sure about starting a business. What business do you want to start in Mexico?

 

Nope. I suggest you read up on New Zealand history, before you comment on it. I recommend this book.

Try to keep up with what has happened with regards to International law over the past two centuries.

What the US got away with in Hawaii, isn't really legal these days....

 

About as legal as the whites down under got away with I suspect.

 

Everyone knows Aborigines were killed for sport.

New Zealand on the other hand... developed along entirely different lines. Read the book.

 

Not all smiles and grin's for the Maori people though is it.

First contact ended in bloodshed. European trade introduced potato's and muskets which allowed extended warfare between Maori tribes, coupled with the spread of European diseases it managed to kill off 60% of the local population in about 200 years while largely eradicating their religion.

Yes they asked for a treaty with the British Empire, but only under the threat of another group of foreign invaders (French) coming ashore. A treaty Great Britain said was in force before all Maori's had a chance to express their vote.

The Maori did assimilate, and you live in a peaceful and prosperous nation, but then that can be said of the US or Canada as well. Getting there wasn't always very pretty though.

 

Not quite.

The treaty came into existence, not to protect the Maori from the French, nor to land grab ahead of the French, but to protect the Maori from the privations of the New Zealand Corporation; a private enterprise bent on exploiting New Zealand.

It's all explained in the book.

 

Nope. But I am holding the State of Israel, to the same standard I would any other occupier of land, including Russia. Occupiers shouldn't build settlements. You want to do that, you annex, not occupy.

Military occupation is distinguished from annexation by its intended temporary nature (i.e. no claim for permanent sovereignty), by its military nature, and by citizenship rights of the controlling power not being conferred upon the subjugated population.

 

Yes but, is this not the prototypical method of land acquisition for the British Empire?. A semi-official commercial entity exploiting the local area, in a deeply incestuous arrangement with the British home office, who eventually manages to seize control of all or nearly all of a native region.

India, South Africa and now New Zealand, all have gone this route.

According to your link, The New Zealand Company wanted only half the country, with the other as a reserve for the native population. Yet with this treaty, the Empire got the entire island in the end. It seems the Maori saw the writing on the wall and made the best deal they could, not necessarily the one they might have preferred.

Not unlike the populations of Native American's.

 

I'd say not. There are significant differences. But you are welcome to your own conclusion.