Comments by "אלי כהן" (@Kohen124) on "Blinken in Tel Aviv in show of US solidarity with Israel" video.
-
3
-
The genocidal Nazi and Palestinian terrorist Amin al-Husayni and Adolf Hitler meeting in Berlin , photo from November 1941.
At the outbreak of World War II Al-Husayni was already established in Berlin and allied himself with the Third Reich , [ 1 ] but his support was of little help at the beginning of the war. However, in 1941 Fascist Italy 's campaigns against the British in Egypt stimulated Al-Husayni to take on more active roles; In that same year, following the successful invasion of Yugoslavia by Axis forces , Al-Husayni promoted the recruitment of Bosnian and Albanian Muslims for the Waffen-SS, helping to form the 13th SS Handschar Mountain Division . [ 4 ] This division became notorious for particularly atrocious massacres committed against Yugoslav partisans .
Al-Husayni managed to meet with Adolf Hitler in November 1941 [ 5 ] and, according to Professor Bernard Lewis , there he would have tried to convince him to extend the extermination of Jews to the territories that Vichy France and Fascist Italy they still controlled in North Africa , and also proposed that the Luftwaffe bomb Tel Aviv , [ 6 ]city inhabited almost entirely by Jews. However, the minutes of the meeting record only the request to Hitler to proclaim German support for the Arab independence movement in Palestine, as well as the Führer's polite refusal. [ 7 ] He remained a guest of the Third Reich , continuing his collaboration with Nazism until shortly before the German capitulation. [ 1 ] He tried to escape to Switzerland , but was rejected at the border and was forced to enter France , where he remained for a year under house arrest.
2
-
The genocidal Nazi and Palestinian terrorist Amin al-Husayni and Adolf Hitler meeting in Berlin , photo from November 1941.
At the outbreak of World War II Al-Husayni was already established in Berlin and allied himself with the Third Reich , [ 1 ] but his support was of little help at the beginning of the war. However, in 1941 Fascist Italy 's campaigns against the British in Egypt stimulated Al-Husayni to take on more active roles; In that same year, following the successful invasion of Yugoslavia by Axis forces , Al-Husayni promoted the recruitment of Bosnian and Albanian Muslims for the Waffen-SS, helping to form the 13th SS Handschar Mountain Division . [ 4 ] This division became notorious for particularly atrocious massacres committed against Yugoslav partisans .
Al-Husayni managed to meet with Adolf Hitler in November 1941 [ 5 ] and, according to Professor Bernard Lewis , there he would have tried to convince him to extend the extermination of Jews to the territories that Vichy France and Fascist Italy they still controlled in North Africa , and also proposed that the Luftwaffe bomb Tel Aviv , [ 6 ]city inhabited almost entirely by Jews. However, the minutes of the meeting record only the request to Hitler to proclaim German support for the Arab independence movement in Palestine, as well as the Führer's polite refusal. [ 7 ] He remained a guest of the Third Reich , continuing his collaboration with Nazism until shortly before the German capitulation. [ 1 ] He tried to escape to Switzerland , but was rejected at the border and was forced to enter France , where he remained for a year under house arrest.
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Educating Western ignorance.
Home » Israeli sovereignty in Judea and Samaria is legal
Israeli sovereignty in Judea and Samaria is legal
May 19, 2020
in Opinion
The imperative of practical sovereignty
The imperative of practical sovereignty. (Reuters)
The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP or DESD), adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on September 13, 2007 by a majority of 144 States with 4 votes in favor and 11 abstentions (A /RES/61/295), recognizes that indigenous peoples have the right to the lands, territories and resources that they have traditionally owned, occupied, used or acquired (Article 26.1) and that the exercise of these rights should not be subject to any discrimination (Article 2).
In accordance with national practice, the legal status and rights of indigenous peoples have evolved and been crystallized in customary international law. For example, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights stated that “there is a norm of customary international law that affirms the rights of indigenous peoples to their traditional lands. The African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights has declared that indigenous peoples' land rights are protected and that these rights are "general principles of law."
France, England, Belgium, Luxembourg, Germany and other countries voted in favor of the Declaration. Since 2007, Australia, Canada, the United States of America and New Zealand, which voted against, have officially adopted the Declaration in 2010. In their relations with Israel (which also voted in favor of the Declaration), these States cannot affirm that the Declaration does not apply to Israeli Jews, as such a position would amount to blatant racial discrimination.
Under international law, Jews are indigenous peoples, also known as "First Peoples", aboriginal peoples or indigenous peoples of a land called Judea-Samaria, Palestine or the Holy Land, and therefore meet the criteria required by international law. .
Jews are an ethnic group that was the original settler of Judea and Samaria 3,500 years ago, when this land was granted to the Jews by the Almighty. The leaders of this world who chose to abstract from history mistakenly called Judea and Samaria the “West Bank” of the Jordan River (which includes Israel) or the “occupied Palestinian territories.”
After the Balfour Declaration (1917), the Treaty of Lausanne (1923), the British Mandate (1922), the San Remo Resolution (1920) and the Treaty of Sèvres (1920), international law was created and recognized and They restored the historic rights of the Jews to their lands. The signatories of these treaties and the Mandate (United Kingdom, France, Turkey, Japan, Italy, etc.) are bound by them.
In the mandate granted to the United Kingdom in August 1922, the League of Nations recognized "the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and the basis for the restoration of their homeland in that country." Thus, the right of the Jewish people to settle in the land of Palestine, their historic homeland, and to establish their State there, is a legitimate right enshrined in international law.
The UNDRIP affirms the right of the Jewish people as indigenous people and "especially their rights to their lands, territories and resources." The time has come for Jews to fully exercise their rights.
United Nations General Assembly resolutions declaring that the colonization of Jews in Jewish Samaria is contrary to international law are only recommendations and have never led to changes in existing binding treaties.
UN Security Council resolutions declaring settlements in Judea and Samaria illegal are not binding. Only the resolutions of Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter are binding on all UN Member States.
For example, Security Council Resolution 2334 was adopted on December 23, 2016 by a vote of 14-0. Four permanent members of the Security Council – China, France, Russia and the United Kingdom – voted in favor, the US abstained. This resolution was not adopted under Chapter VII of the Charter. It is not binding. That resolution states that Israel's settlement activity constitutes a "flagrant violation" of international law. It has "no legal validity." This resolution violates UNDRIP, the British Mandate and the other treaties.
1
-
of the Jewish people The right to <<settle>> in Judea and Samaria, and Israel's right to annex some parts of Judea and Samaria (part of Palestine) derive from the mandate (Levy Report of July 9, 2012). In accordance with the mandate, the right to annex some parts of Judea and Samaria is a direct consequence of the right of Jews to settle throughout Palestine, that is, in the territory of the 1936 mandate.
Article 80 of the United Nations Charter (1945) recognized the validity of existing rights that States and peoples acquired under the various mandates, including the British Mandate over Palestine (1922), and the rights of Jews to settle in Palestine (Judea-Samaria) under those instruments. (Pr. E. Rostow). These rights cannot be altered by the UN.
Except as agreed in the terms of the instruments
individual administration agreements shall be construed in any way that modifies in any way the rights of any States or peoples or existing international rights to which the Members of the United Nations may respectively be parties. (Article 80, paragraph 1, Charter of the United Nations)
In a series of decisions and advisory opinions on Namibia, the International Court of Justice ruled that a League Mandate is a binding international instrument like a treaty, which continues as a fiduciary obligation of the international community until its terms are fulfilled. In the Namibia case, the Court upheld the Security Council's ruling that South Africa had abandoned its rights as a Mandatory Power by failing to fulfill some of its fundamental duties. The mandate survived as a trust, based on the legal principles confirmed by Article 80 of the Charter.
Like the South African Mandate, the Palestine Mandate survived the termination of British administration as a trust under Article 80 of the United Nations Charter (Pr. E Rostow).
Therefore, there are Jewish rights of <<settlement>> in the so-called «West Bank» (Palestine); It cannot be seriously maintained, as the European Union, Western States, France, the United Kingdom, Russia, China and other States do, that the Israeli settlements in Judea and Samaria are illegal and that the annexation is contrary to international law. This position is political, not legal. Despite UN resolutions to the contrary, the establishment of Israeli civilian settlements in the West Bank is not incompatible with international law, said US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo.
Israel, the Jewish State, as a member of the international community has the right but also the duty to fulfill the mandate that most nations ignored fearing terrorism and the Muslim world, animated by 2000 years of religious hatred and anti-Semitism.
One hundred and three years have passed since the Balfour Declaration, 73 years since the rejection of United Nations General Assembly Resolution 181 on November 29, 1947, 52 years since the Six-Day War of 1967 and 27 years since the Oslo Accords. The Oslo Accords of 1993 and 1995 were signed but did not lead to peace. The Arab Muslim leaders of Judea Samaria and Gaza do not want peace, they rejected Israel's offer made in 2000 and 2008 to live in peace.
The participation of the Palestinian Authority security apparatus in the slaughter of Jews since 1993 is proof, as is the payment of prisoners involved in crimes related to terrorism. Abbas's threats that the Palestinians will provoke an "uprising" after the Bahrain Conference and after Israel applies sovereignty over Judea and Samaria must be taken seriously. Abbas is definitely not interested in peace.
Israel has a duty to draw the logical consequences of this behavior and annex all or some of the territories of area C, to ensure the existence of its population within secure borders, and to be able to receive the 6 million Jews who still live in exile, who wish to settle in Israel.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1