August 02, 2018

The truth about Israel's Nation-State Law

Sheila Gunn ReidRebel Host | The Gunn Show

On this week's episode of The Gunn Show, Brian of London, a British-Israeli blogger, joined me to debunk the anti-semitic left's narrative on Israel's nation-state law.

The law states that “the right to exercise national self-determination” in Israel is “unique to the Jewish people", establishes "Jewish settlement as a national value", and declares Hebrew the official language. 

None of this is particularly surprising, but that isn't preventing Islamists and leftists from losing their minds.

WATCH my interview with Brian to see how religious minorities receive better treatment in Israel than in any nation in the region, and why Israelis of multiple faiths support the nation-state law.

You must be logged in to comment. Click here to log in.
commented 2018-08-04 04:39:14 -0400
The comments below fail to account for the change in International Law around the “Right of Conquest“.

The right of a triumphant Military Force to maintain possession of conquered territory was a principle of International Law until its official replacement was codified in the Nuremberg Principles, developed as part of the Charter of the Nuremberg Tribunal in 1945 and finally in 1974 as the United Nations General Assembly Resolution #3314.

Contributing to the impetus that finally led to the end of the "Right of Conquest”, was the Kellogg – Briand pact of 1928 that made aggressive war illegal.

All the comments referring to the rights of those conquered to reclaim territory are irrelevant since passage of International Law rendered that right ended in 1946.

These facts mean that the Allies conquest of the Middle East in the First World War, entitled them to territorial ownership of the land they conquered. The British were therefore able to do what they liked with the British Mandated Area, including propose a Jewish homeland within it in 1917 (Balfour Declaration). It was also fully legal for the British to propose a Partition Plan to divide the territory they owned.

The United Nations Partition Plan was ratified by the majority of UN members and became the strictly legal foundation for both a Jewish nation called Israel and an Arab nation called Palestine. The Arabs rejected the Partition Plan and refused to abide by it. The Israelis accepted the UN partition, despite their share being only 20% of the total.

The Arabs declared war on Israel the same day that it was declared a new nation. Seven Arab nations attacked Israel in a war declared as an attempt to destroy it and its people. The Arab attack was eventually defeated and Israel survived as a legally legitimate Jewish nation since then. The Arabs have waged 4 aggressive wars against Israel since 1948 although Jordan’s illegal occupation of Jerusalem holy sites in 1948 was finally ended in 1967 in the Six Day War These territories have been in dispute since then. The territories are not occupied in the legal sense of the word – they are “disputed territories”. Final status negotiations have not yet occurred and will not be finalised without bilateral agreement. What is important to remember is that Jordan’s invasion & annexation of territory belonging to Israel under the Partition Plan, was illegal and remains so today.

Ownership of land cannot therefore be determined by who conquered the land in ancient times. Instead, in modern times, the history of conquest and occupation and ownership is a component of negotiations, mediation, agreements, treaties and other such peaceful procedures.

For example, the recent annexation by force of Crimea by Russia is illegal and the history of conquest and ownership of this region prior to 1946 will be only one weak historical component in any future negotiations regarding the final status of Crimea. In the case of Crimea, agreement had been concluded under International Law after the fall of the USSR that it would be part of the independent nation of Ukraine and therefore, Russia had absolutely no legal right to invade or annex it. The success of their military conquest does not give Russia any claim on the territory they conquered and International Law is highly likely to return Crimea to the Ukraine at sometime in the future.
commented 2018-08-02 23:08:36 -0400
Amy Lynn, you are a horrible, disgusting, evil human being in my opinion.
commented 2018-08-02 21:58:30 -0400
Amy, as if anyone can draw a direct line between Canaanites of 4000 years ago and who no longer exist and anyone living today. The reality is that people moved around constantly. It would be impossible to say what ancient descendants anyone had from small people groups then. Abraham came out of Ur of the Chaldees. Does the mean Iran and Iraq should welcome the Jews as long lost brothers?

Gads you lefties can be clueless.
commented 2018-08-02 18:05:51 -0400
“Canaanites were there before the Jews.”

Well, with that logic, AMY, all of us all may as well screw off back to whatever corner of the universe our great, great, grand parents crawled out of. And why stop there?

Besides, if we accept the biblical story that the Israelites displaced/slaughtered the Canaanites, then we have to continue with that line of thought and ask whom the Canaanites displaced.

In any event, the entire “first nation” argument is a crock of crap….whether it’s in North America or the Middle East. I don’t believe the “out-of-Egypt” story in the bible any more than I believe the “oral histories” assurances from Indian chiefs wearing Hollywood regalia. Israelites displaced Canaanites, The Ojibwe pushed out the Sioux, and the Iroquois slaughtered the Huron.

The entire history of humanity, on any continent, in any epoch, has been nothing but bloody and brutal struggles for existence and/or power. It goes on today, and it will happen in the future. Simply put, possession IS nine-tenths of the law. But if we were to go with your entirely stupid proposition that, as far as Israel is concerned, things should go back as they were, then you are proposing a concept which, once precedent was set, would set the stage for a global upheaval the likes of which has never been countenanced.

Which can lead us to one conclusion: your comments are so silly and blatantly provocative that you can only be posting them for the sole purpose of your own childish amusement. And that’s so sad.
commented 2018-08-02 14:25:28 -0400
commented 2018-08-02 13:33:58 -0400
No, they’re not. Canaanites were there before the Jews. Their Descendents can be found in modern-day Lebanon. I hope they fight to get their homeland back.
commented 2018-08-02 13:24:04 -0400
The Jews are the indigenous people of the region . Period.