Rockets are not the issue – Israel is.

The Palestinian case at the ICC is legal, not political, Ashkenazi Jews are not even a Semitic people – it is the Arabs and minority, Sephardic Jewish people who are the Semites. Not that it should matter what they are, the human body is just a container for the infinite consciousness to which we all belong, but such labels are used by these people to suppress debate and so we need to counteract the propaganda.

United Nations resolution 37/43, dated 3 December 1982, “reaffirms the legitimacy of the struggle of peoples for independence, territorial integrity, national unity and liberation from colonial and foreign domination and foreign occupation by all available means, including armed struggle.”

If Biden wanted to pit himself as an alternative to the Trump administration’s policies, he would have called out the current attempts at displacing the Palestinian families of Sheikh Jarrah as part of Israel’s de facto annexation of Palestinian territory. Instead, Biden gave the green light for Israel to terrorize Gaza and the occupied West Bank. Rockets are not the issue – Israel is.

Unless Israel’s colonial violence is addressed and permanently stopped, Palestinians need the minimum of diplomatic support – that they have the right to defend themselves against decades of forced displacement.

Pro-Israel propaganda is not only extraordinarily well funded and organized, but also meticulously scientific. For instance, Israeli researchers discovered that replacing nouns with verbs reduced levels of anger or tension in those they were speaking to – whether it’s the Palestinian people living under the heel of its brutal occupation, or the broader international community.

They discovered that employing nouns instead of verbs had a “calming effect,” which, in turn, improved levels of support for Israel’s often draconian and controversial policies.

For example, the statement, “I am in favor of the removal of settlers” (noun) invoked far less anger from Jewish Israelis who were exposed to the use of the verb, “I am in favor of removing settlers.”

“The one is more like a statement of an abstract belief,” observes The Economist. “The other is more like a prescription of a course of action and is thus, the researchers hypothesized, more likely to arouse emotions.”

As the international community, albeit with the notable exception of the United States, condemned Israel’s savage, indiscriminate, and illegitimate use of deadly force against Palestinian protesters in Gaza, which culminated in the deaths of more than 120 and the injuries of thousands more since the Great Return March protests began, Israel has turned the hasbara machine onto overdrive.

Turn on any US cable news network, and you’ll see one pro-Israeli pundit or representative blame Palestinians for their own deaths, or Hamas, or a combination of both.

“Israel has a right to defend itself” is the well trodden out trope, which is typically followed with the question, “What would you do if Hamas were firing rockets into your neighborhood?”

All of which is taking place in the media while US ambassador Nikki Haley praises Israel at the United Nations for “showing restraint.”

Yes, you read that right. While nearly every single member nation at the UN calls for an enquiry into Israel’s massacre of unarmed Palestinian protesters—many of whom were in the back and hundreds of meters from the perimeter fence—the United States government is lauding praise on unthreatened Israeli snipers.

The battle for legitimacy

When Israel says it has a “right to defend itself,” the correct response is to ask from what or whom? 

Not a single Israeli citizen or soldier has been harmed or killed by Palestinians since the protests began.

In short, Israel is shooting and killing human beings who pose absolutely zero threat to either the state of Israel or its citizens.

Moreover, never once have you ever heard an American journalist ask an Israeli war crimes apologist, “Well, don’t Palestinians have a right do defend themselves, too?”

It’s such a self-evidently obvious and simple question, but no one dare asks it. I mean, why not? 

When Palestinians support non-violent forms of resistance, such as the boycott Israel movement, they’re smeared by Israel as “anti-Semites.”

When they protest against their injustices angrily, they’re smeared as violent Arabs, and when they resort to violence, out of sheer desperation, they’re labeled “radical Islamic terrorists.”

So, I’ll ask again. Do Palestinians have a right to defend themselves?

The answer to that question is a resounding yes.

In fact, international law is unambiguous in its endorsement of “armed struggle” for peoples who seek self-determination under “colonial and foreign domination.”

United Nations resolution 37/43, dated 3 December 1982, “reaffirms the legitimacy of the struggle of peoples for independence, territorial integrity, national unity and liberation from colonial and foreign domination and foreign occupation by all available means, including armed struggle.”

Moreover, the resolution’s preamble makes clear that it refers not to a hypothetical in the abstract, but rather specifically to the rights of Palestinians, stating, “Considering that the denial of the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people to self-determination, sovereignty, independence and return to Palestine and the repeated acts of aggression by Israel against the peoples of the region constitute a serious threat to international peace and security.”

Lynda Burstein Brayer is an Israeli-trained human rights lawyer, and she affirms the legal and moral right Palestinians have to armed struggle against Israel’s occupation, noting, “This document [UN resolution 37/43] legitimises all national liberation struggles, including, at this time in history, most particularly, the Palestinian people’s struggle for its own freedom.

It is this right which legitimises all Palestinian attempts to lift the yoke of Israeli oppression from Palestine, including all the actions taken by the Palestinians during Operation Cast Lead [Israel’s 2008/09 siege of Gaza].”

Now we have completely flipped pro-Israel propaganda on its head. 

Under international law, Israel’s occupation of the Palestinian territories is illegal, and Palestinians have a right to “armed struggle” against their illegal occupier – Israel – thus ipso facto Palestinians have a right to defend themselves against Israel, but Israel’s right to defend itself against Palestinian resistance is not guaranteed in the same manner.

This reality should be chanted far and loud for it undercuts every Israeli attempt to couch its violence against the Palestinian people in claims of self-defense.

What solidarity looks like

In particular, the “anti-war” left, who’ve long led the charge for Palestinian liberation in Western media have a responsibility to now defend all forms of Palestinian resistance, including violence. 

To support only non-violent forms of Palestinian resistance is to be not only a weak ally of Palestinian aspirations, but also an unwitting party to Israel’s efforts to obscure the reality of international law.

“For those who have never felt the constant yoke of oppression, or seen it up close, it is a vision beyond comprehension,” observes Stanley Cohen, a Jewish American lawyer. “Occupation sits heavy on the occupied, every day in every way, limiting who you are and what you may dare to become.”

For 70 years, Palestinians have been resisting the brutal realities of Israel’s colonial project and what has become the world’s longest military occupation in modern times.

Seemingly, it matters not whether Palestinians choose violent or peaceful resistance.

They’re sniped and gunned down while protesting; they’re bombed and strafed periodically; and they’re denied basic human rights, including freedom of movement and freedom from want or fear.

“When we take the diplomatic road, our people are dragged in a debate over our humanity,” tweeted Mariam Barghouti, a Palestinian journalist.

“When we resist with arms, we are terrorists and killed, when we resist through non-violence, like BDS, we are targeted and vilified, when we protest with our tongues or slaps, we are put in prison.”

International law, however, sides with the struggle for Palestinian liberation, and is vehemently opposed to Israel’s transgressions, and thus the international community must stand in solidarity with the Palestinian people, because in conflict between occupier and the occupied, only the occupied have a lawful and moral right to defend themselves.

UN General Assembly adopts five anti-Israeli resolutions

The United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) has approved five anti-Israeli resolutions, which are part of a package of 20 pro-Palestinian texts that the 193-member body adopts on an annual basis.

If nothing else, at least the historical record will accurately reflect the soulless depravity of the occupying impostors.

One of the documents, passed on Wednesday, condemned Israeli sovereignty over the occupied Golan Heights — a territory the Tel Aviv regime seized from Syria in the 1967 Six Day War and annexed four years later — in a move that was never recognized by the world community.

Endorsed by 88-9 votes with 62 abstentions, the resolution urges Israel to withdraw from the “occupied Syrian Golan to the line of 4 June 1967 in implementation of the relevant Security Council resolutions.”

It also affirmed that Israel’s unilateral annexation of the Syrian territory in 1981 “constitutes a stumbling block in the way of achieving a just, comprehensive and lasting peace in the region.”  

Over the past decades, Israel has built dozens of settlements in the Golan Heights in defiance of international calls for the regime to stop its construction activities on the occupied land.

Damascus has repeatedly reaffirmed its sovereignty over the Golan Heights, saying the area must be completely restored to its control.

In a major pro-Israel policy shift, US President Donald Trump signed an executive order in 2019 recognizing Israel’s control over occupied Golan in a blatant violation of international law.

The second resolution, entitled a “Peaceful Settlement of the Question of Palestine,” was approved 145-7, with nine abstentions.

It called on the Tel Aviv regime to withdraw from all territory over the pre-1967 lines in occupied East Jerusalem al-Quds, the West Bank and the Golan Heights.

The document also demanded a halt to Israel’s settlement construction activities, spoke of the illegality of annexation plans, and warned the occupying entity against making changes in East Jerusalem al-Quds.

It further took Israel to task for a wide range of actions against the Palestinian people, including the demolition of their homes in Area C of the West Bank.

The three remaining UNGA resolutions affirmed the work of UN Committees operating on behalf of the Palestinians.

Before the vote, Israel’s Ambassador to the UN Gilad Erdan chastised the General Assembly for not referencing the regime’s recent normalization deals with the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and Bahrain.

“Can this forum be any more detached from the real world?” he asked, claiming, “Instead of encouraging the Palestinians to see how these agreements can transform the region and be used as a catalyst for peace with Israel, this institution votes in favor of these biased resolutions.”

A Palestinian representative denounced Erdan’s “flip” and “offensive” comments, including one where he accused the UNGA of being detached from reality.

“On the contrary, what was discussed today in this debate is the reality. What was discussed today is not so-called ‘Palestinian talking points.’ These are the international talking points,” she said. “This is the international consensus that Israel, the occupying power, continues to object, obstruct, to deny, to belittle and to attempt futilely to destroy.”

The regime has gotten “accustomed to violating the law with zero consequences,” she added. “Only accountability can change this miserable situation and give hope for a future of justice and peace…The hypocritical and degrading claim by the Israeli representative that this institution’s approach has failed perhaps should highlight even more the need or concrete actions by states to implement the resolutions adopted by the UNGA to ensure accountability.”

She also stressed that the passage of the anti-Israel texts showed that support for the Palestinian people remained strong.

Before the General Assembly’s vote, a Jordanian representative, whose country is the custodian of the holy sites in Jerusalem al-Quds, said Israel must maintain the status quo at Haram al-Sharif or Temple Mount.

Zionists capture and desecrate the Muslim sanctuary in Jerusalem.

Israel is attempting to “impose a fait accompli on al-Aqsa mosque and Jerusalem,” he said, adding that the occupied city’s “holy sites will remain the focus of Jordanian care and guardianship.”Jordan will “combat a new fait accompli or change the historic or legal status of the holy city especially at the al-Aqsa Mosque,” he emphasized.

Separately, Palestinian Ambassador to the UN Riyad Mansour asked the international community to hold Israel accountable for its violations of international law and stick to the so-called two-state solution to the Middle East conflict.

He also called for a boycott of Israeli settlement products and urged Western nations to recognize Palestinian statehood.

Palestinian PM calls for boycott of Israeli settlements

In another development on Wednesday, Palestinian Prime Minister Mohammed Shtayyeh urged donor countries and international organizations to take serious measures towards boycotting Israeli settlements.

He stressed that the status quo imposed by Israel is deteriorating as the Palestinian land is shrinking, the settlers’ violence is escalating, and access to resources is decreasing daily.

“Economic development is not separate from the political and national project.

Rather, it is a lever towards ending the occupation and establishing the Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital,” he said, noting that the world must move to end this occupation because the current status quo cannot continue.

Iran envoy blasts Israel for violating Palestinians’ rights

Mohammad Reza Sahraei, counselor at Iran’s Mission to the UN, said the International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People provides an opportunity to “highlight the dire and painful situation endured by Palestinians over the course of decades as a result of the gross and systematic violation of their rights by the Israeli regime.”

“The question of Palestine is the longest-running crisis of our time with no foreseeable conclusion in sight….

In fact, the non-compliance of the occupying regime with relevant international laws and regulations has further prevented the international community from achieving a just and lasting solution to the crisis,” he said.

“After more than seven decades, the Israeli regime has continued to violate the fundamental human rights and dignities of the Palestinian people as well as other Arabs living under its occupation.

As a result, Palestinians are not only deprived of their lands and properties while being forcibly evicted but also subjected to violence, terror, and intimidation,” the diplomat added.


“I Shouted Out, Who Killed the Kennedys?”


“International forces are looking for excuses to target Muammar.
What has he done to deserve this?” asked Gaddafi’s wife Safia.
“My children are civilians and they have been targeted.
What do they have to do with this?
UN is committing war crimes.
They killed my son and the Libyan people.
They are defaming our reputation.
Forty countries are against us.
Life has no value anymore.
What would I want with life now?
All I want out of life now is that the truth be heard.
By the will of God, we will be victorious.
We will live or die alongside the Libyan people.
In the end, history will judge us.”

01.10.2009 

“In response to “Abhorrent anti-Semitic slurs and despicable conspiracy theories” by Gaddafi critics

Muammar Gaddafi threw the UN general assembly into chaos when he effectively hijacked the podium to make a rambling, unscripted speech.

“The UN says that armed force shall only be used in the common interest of all nations, but what has happened since then?

Sixty-five wars have broken out since the establishment of the United Nations and the Security Council — 65 since their creation, with millions more victims than in the Second World War.

Are those wars, and the aggression and force that were used in those 65 wars, in the common interest of us all? No, they were in the interest of one or three or four countries, but not of all nations. 

From the beginning, since it was established in 1945, the Security Council has failed to provide security. On the contrary, it has provided terror and sanctions. It is only used against us.

Why is veto power only given to a few countries? Can it be given to other countries as well? - Quora

Why is veto power only given to a few countries?

For this reason, we will no longer be committed to implementing Security Council resolutions after this speech, which marks the 40th anniversary.
Sixty-five wars have broken out: either fighting among small countries or wars of aggression waged against us by super-Powers.

The Security Council, in clear violation of the Charter of the United Nations, failed to take action to stop these wars or acts of aggression against small nations and peoples.

The General Assembly will vote on a number of historic proposals.

North African Countries: Algeria, Chad, Egypt, Ethopia, Guinea, Jordan, Libya, Mali, Morocco ...

Either we act as one or we will fragment. If each nation were to have its own version of the General Assembly, the Security Council and the various instruments and each were to have an equal footing, the Powers that currently fill the permanent seats would be confined to use of their own sovereign bodies, whether there be three or four of them, and would have to exercise their rights against themselves. This is of no concern to us.

At the Libyan border, I recently stopped 1,000 African migrants headed for Europe. I asked them why they were going there. They told me it was to take back their stolen wealth — that they would not be leaving otherwise.

Who can restore the wealth that was taken from us? If you decide to restore all of this wealth, there will be no more immigration from the Philippines, Latin America, Mauritius and India. Let us have the wealth that was stolen from us.

ranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad speaks during the 66th session of the General Assembly at United Nations headquarters.

Ahmadinejad attacked the US for its history of slavery, causing two world wars and using a nuclear bomb against defenseless people. It also slated the country for supporting military dictatorships and totalitarian regimes in Asia, Africa and Latin America. US diplomats left the chamber, quickly followed by some of their European counterparts. “lalala we can’t hear you”

Africa deserves $777 trillion in compensation from the countries that colonized it. Africans will demand that amount, and if you do not give it to them, they will go to where you have taken those trillions of dollars. They have the right to do so. They have to follow that money and to bring it back.

The wars that took place after the establishment of the United Nations — why did they occur? Where was the Security Council, where was the Charter, where was the United Nations? There should be investigations and judicial intervention.

Why have there been massacres? We can start with the Korean War because it took place after the establishment of the United Nations. How did a war break out and cause millions of victims? Nuclear weapons could have been used in that war.

vox.com GIFs Search | Find, Make & Share Gfycat GIFs

Those who are responsible for causing the war should be tried and should pay compensation and damages.

Then we come to the Suez Canal war of 1956. That file should be opened wide. Three countries with permanent seats on the Security Council and with the right of veto in the Council attacked a member State of this General Assembly.

A country that was a sovereign State — Egypt — was attacked, its army was destroyed, thousands of Egyptians were killed and many Egyptian towns and entities were destroyed, all because Egypt wanted to nationalize the Suez Canal. [In response, Israel invaded in late October, and British and French troops landed in early November, occupying the canal zone.] 

How could such a thing have happened during the era of the United Nations and its Charter? How is it possible to guarantee that such a thing will not be repeated unless we make amends for past wrongs? Those were dangerous events and the Suez Canal and Korean War files should be re-opened.

Cinema Clip

Journalist Keyes Beech noted that “it is not a good time to be a Korean, for Yankees are shooting them all.”

Next we come to the Viet Nam war. There were 3 million victims of that war. During 12 days, more bombs were dropped than during four years of the Second World War. It was a fiercer war, and it took place after the establishment of the United Nations and after we had decided that there would be no more wars.

The future of humankind is at stake. We cannot stay silent. How can we feel safe? How can we be complacent? This is the future of the world, and we who are in the General Assembly of the United Nations must make sure that such wars are not repeated in the future.

Al Chalem | The REAL American Financial Group $87 Million Scam

Then Panama was attacked, even though it was an independent member State of the General Assembly. Four thousand people were killed, and the President of that country was taken prisoner and put in prison. Noriega should be released — we should open that file.

How can we entitle a country that is a United Nations Member State to wage war against another country and capture its president, treat him as a criminal and put him in prison? Who would accept that? It could be repeated. We should not stay quiet. We should have an investigation.

Any one of us Member States could face the same situation, especially if such aggression is by a Member State with a permanent seat on the Security Council and with the responsibility to maintain peace and security worldwide.

310 Victory GIF - Find & Share on GIPHY

Che Guevara 1964 speech at UN : Those who kill their own children and discriminate daily against them because of the color of their skin; those who let the murderers of blacks remain free, protecting them, and furthermore punishing the black population because they demand their legitimate rights as free men — how can those who do this consider themselves guardians of freedom? We understand that today the Assembly is not in a position to ask for explanations of these acts. It must be clearly established, however, that the government of the United States is not the champion of freedom, but rather the perpetrator of exploitation and oppression against the peoples of the world and against a large part of its own population.

Che Guevara     Killed by CIA operatives.

Then there was the war in Grenada. That country was invaded even though it was a Member State. It was attacked by 5,000 war ships, 7,000 troops and dozens of military aircraft, and it is the smallest country in the world.

Reagan: the government of Grenada was in chaos; Americans were in danger; and nearby governments requested our help. So we sent in troops. Does this sound at all familiar? As it happens, there was little evidence that any Americans were in danger, and the nearby governments had asked for help largely because Reagan had requested it.

This occurred after the establishment of the United Nations and of the Security Council and its veto. And the President of Grenada, Mr. Maurice Bishop, was assassinated. How could that have happened with impunity?

It is a tragedy. How can we guarantee that the United Nations is good or not, that a certain country is good or not? Can we be safe or happy about our future or not? Can we trust the Security Council or not? Can we trust the United Nations or not?

We must look into and investigate the bombing of Somalia. Somalia is a United Nations Member State. It is an independent country under the rule of Aidid. We want an investigation. Why did that happen? Who allowed it to happen? Who gave the green light for that country to be attacked?

Then there is the former Yugoslavia. No country was as peaceful as Yugoslavia, constructed step by step and piece by piece after being destroyed by Hitler. We destroyed it, as if we were doing the same job as Hitler.

Tito built that peaceful country step by step and brick by brick and then we arrived and broke it apart for imperialistic, personal interests. How can we be complacent about that? Why can we not be satisfied?

If a peaceful country like Yugoslavia faced such a tragedy, the General Assembly should have an investigation and should decide who should be tried before the International Criminal Court.

Then we have the war in Iraq — the mother of all evils. The United Nations should also investigate that. The General Assembly, presided over by Mr. Treki, should investigate that. The invasion of Iraq was a violation of the United Nations Charter.

saddam-hussein GIFs Search | Find, Make & Share Gfycat GIFs

saddam-hussein GIFs Search | Find, Make & Share Gfycat GIFs

It was done without any justification by super-Powers with permanent seats on the Security Council. Iraq is an independent country and a member State of the General Assembly. How could those countries attack Iraq? As provided for in the Charter, the United Nations should have intervened and stopped the attack.

Why was Iraq invaded? The invasion itself was a serious violation of the United Nations Charter, and it was wrong. There was also a total massacre or genocide. More than 1.5 million Iraqis were killed. We want to bring the Iraqi file before the International Criminal Court (ICC), and we want those who committed mass murder against the Iraqi people to be tried.”

Amnesty International Confirms US Gave ISIS $1 Billion of Weapons 

There are other things as well. Why is it that Iraqi prisoners of war can be sentenced to death? When Iraq was invaded and the President of Iraq was taken he was a prisoner of war. He should not have been tried; he should not have been hanged.

When the war was over, he should have been released. We want to know why a prisoner of war should have been tried. Who sentenced the President of Iraq to death? Is there an answer to that question?

We know the identity of the judge who tried him. As to who tied the noose around the President’s neck on the day of sacrifice and hanged him, those people wore masks.

How could this have happened in a civilized world? These were prisoners of war of civilized countries under international law. How could Government ministers and a head of State be sentenced to death and hanged? Were those who tried them lawyers or members of a judicial system?

Abu-Ghraib | Displaced Palestinians

My third point on the Iraq war relates to Abu Ghraib. This was a disgrace to humankind. I know that the United States authorities will investigate this scandal, but the United Nations must not ignore it either. The General Assembly should investigate this matter.

Prisoners of war held in Abu Ghraib prison were torturers; dogs were set on them; men were raped. This is unprecedented in the history of war. It was sodomy, and it was an unprecedented sin, never before committed by past aggressors or invaders.

Prisoners of war are soldiers, but these were raped in prison by a State, a permanent member of the Security Council. This goes against civilization and humankind. We must not keep silent; we must know the facts.

Even today, a quarter of a million Iraqi prisoners, men and women alike, remain in Abu Ghraib. They are being maltreated, persecuted and raped. There must be an investigation.

Turning to the war in Afghanistan, this too must be investigated. Why are we against the Taliban? Why are we against Afghanistan? Who are the Taliban? If the Taliban want a religious State, that is fine.

Afghanistan is a productive war.

Think of the Vatican. Does the Vatican pose a threat to us? No. It is a religious, very peaceful State. If the Taliban want to create an Islamic Emirate, who says that this makes them an enemy?

Is anyone claiming that Bin Laden is of the Taliban or that he is Afghan? Is Bin Laden of the Taliban? No; he is not of the Taliban and he is not Afghan. Were the terrorists who hit New York City of the Taliban? Were they from Afghanistan? They were neither Taliban nor Afghan. Then, what was the reason for the wars in Iraq and in Afghanistan?

Next is the assassination of United States President Kennedy in 1963. We want to know who killed him and why. There was somebody called Lee Harvey Oswald, who was then killed by one Jack Ruby. Why did he kill him? Jack Ruby, an Israeli, killed Lee Harvey Oswald, who killed Kennedy.

Why did this Israeli kill Kennedy’s killer? Then Jack Ruby, the killer of the killer of Kennedy, died in mysterious circumstances before he could be tried. We must open the files. The whole world knows that Kennedy wanted to investigate the Israeli Dimona nuclear reactor. This involves international peace and security and weapons of mass destruction. That is why we should open this file.

Why Are We Above International Law?

Solve Israel's Problems » Please Share Our Articles » Famous Jewish Magicians
US/Israel are selling lies and illusion. Don’t give them power by believing that the US can move capitals! US moved it’s embassy and that’s the lot of it. The US actually has no jurisdiction outside its own borders and embassies. In 1980, Israel passed the “Jerusalem Law”, stating that “Jerusalem, complete and united, is the capital of Israel”, thereby formalising its annexation of East Jerusalem.

In response, the UN Security Council passed Resolution 478 in 1980, declaring the law “null and void”. The illegal Israeli annexation of East Jerusalem violates several principles under international law, which outlines that an occupying power  does not  have sovereignty in the territory it occupies. The move sparked global condemnation from world leaders. Likewise, the US is the only country in the world so far to recognize Israel’s annexation of Syria’s Golan Heights. Trump’s proclamation of gifting the Golan Heights to Israel isn’t worth the paper it is written on.

Security Council resolution 497:
“Decides that the Israeli decision to impose its laws, jurisdiction and administration in the occupied Syrian Golan Heights is null and void and without international legal effect;
Determines that all legislative and administrative measures and actions taken by Israel, the occupying Power, which have altered or purport to alter the character and status of the Holy City of Jerusalem, and in particular the recent “basic law” on Jerusalem, are null and void and must be rescinded forthwith”

“Jerusalem is the capital of Israel. The Golan Heights belongs to Israel. The Palestinians don’t exist, and if you see one, kill him, he’s a terrorist.”

In what The Guardian called an “excoriating attack” on the International Criminal Court, or ICC, Bolton said, “The United States will use any means necessary to protect our citizens and those of our allies from unjust prosecution by this illegitimate court.”

In calling it “this illegitimate court,” Bolton was referring to the only international venue now in existence for trying alleged war criminals whose countries cannot or will not prosecute them. By “our allies,” Bolton appeared to mean Israel, a supposition Pompeo confirmed last week when he told reporters, “These visa restrictions may also be used to deter ICC efforts to pursue allied personnel, including Israelis.”

And when it came to threats, Bolton didn’t stop there. He also suggestedthat the United States might even arrest ICC officials:

“We will ban its judges and prosecutors from entering the United States. We will sanction their funds in the U.S. financial system, and we will prosecute them in the U.S. criminal system. We will do the same for any company or state that assists an ICC investigation of Americans.”*

International court judge resigns, citing ‘shocking’ interference from ‘above the law’ US

A senior judge has resigned from the UN International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague, after the United States threatened judges investigating alleged US war crimes in Afghanistan.

The judge, Christoph Flügge, has worked with the International Criminal Court (ICC) and the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) since 2008. More recently, he got involved with a preliminary investigations into claims that US military service members and CIA operatives tortured prisoners in Afghanistan.

Flügge told German newspaper Zeit that he handed in his resignation after open threats from US officials, including a speech by hawkish national security adviser John Bolton last September, where Bolton “wished death” on the Court.

US Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley warns the US will be “taking names” of the countries that vote in favor of a resolution that condemns the Trump administration’s decision to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.

“If these judges ever interfere in the domestic concerns of the US or investigate an American citizen, he said the American government would do all it could to ensure that these judges would no longer be allowed to travel to the United States – and that they would perhaps even be criminally prosecuted,” Flügge told Zeit, in an interview translated by The Guardian.

“The American security adviser held his speech at a time when The Hague was planning preliminary investigations into American soldiers who had been accused of torturing people in Afghanistan,” Flügge explained. “The American threats against international judges clearly show the new political climate. It is shocking. I had never heard such a threat.”

Bolton’s speech was delivered in September to the conservative Federalist Society in Washington, DC. It came a year after the ICC began investigating claims that at least 61 detained persons in Afghanistan had been tortured by American troops and another 27 by the CIA at secret prisons in Afghanistan and abroad, according to prosecutor Fatou Bensouda.

Bolton called the investigation “utterly unfounded” and “unjustifiable,” and promised to “protect our citizens and those of our allies from unjust prosecution by this illegitimate court.”

John Bolton GIF - John Bolton Evil - Discover & Share GIFs

The senior US official also vowed to defend Israeli citizens from the court. US “friend and ally” Israel was at the time accused of perpetrating war crimes against Palestinian civilians. He warned that the US would disregard arrest warrants, ban judges and prosecutors from entering the country, and even try them in American courts.

Flügge said his colleagues were “stunned” that “the US would roll out such heavy artillery,” but added “it is consistent with the new American line: ‘We are No 1 and we stand above the law’.”

Che Guevara’s criticism against the United States

Che Guevara’s visit to Gaza in 1959 was the first sign of transforming the Zionist colonization of Palestine from a regional conflict to a global struggle against colonialism. I would think there is no doubt the Zionists were in on it. CIA and MOSSAD don’t do one thing without the other. Obviously the Jewish mob was profiting as mush as the US.

The Jewish mob produced heroine in Cuba and sold it in the USA, imported cocaine from the USA and sold in Cuba, run gambling casinos in Havana, prostitution naturally, but were also involved in much of legal Cuban business. It was not only Lansky’s Mafia family, but there were the bankers and the CIA, Dulles and the United Fruit co. The American Secretary of State John Foster Dulles was an avowed opponent of Communism (not really communism, just nationalizing resources)  whose law firm of Sullivan and Cromwell[10] had represented United Fruit. His brother Allen Dulles was the director of the CIA, and was a board member of United Fruit. 

It is Che Guevara’s criticism against the United States that still resonates today as protests against systemic police brutality spread across the country and even in other parts of the world:

“Those who kill their own children and discriminate daily against them because of the color of their skin; those who let the murderers of blacks remain free, protecting them, and furthermore punishing the black population because they demand their legitimate rights as free men — how can those who do this consider themselves guardians of freedom?

We understand that today the Assembly is not in a position to ask for explanations of these acts. It must be clearly established, however, that the government of the United States is not the champion of freedom, but rather the perpetrator of exploitation and oppression against the peoples of the world and against a large part of its own population.”

Countries targeted by US imperialism must turn to Russia as an ally.

Bay of pigs and cuban missile crisis

Israhell Guilty As Hell

Israel Broke Int’l Law, Committed War Crimes, Shooting 6,000 Gaza Protesters

They’re trying to narrow it down to individuals. That’s baloney. This is Israhell official policy.

GENEVA: A UN probe released Thursday said Israel have committed crimes against humanity in responding to last year’s unrest in Gaza, as snipers “intentionally” shot civilians including children, journalists and the disabled.

The UN Independent Commission of Inquiry on the protests in the Occupied Palestinian Territory investigated possible violations during demonstrations in the Gaza strip between March 30 and Dec.31 last year.

Commission chairman Santiago Canton said Israeli soldiers committed multiple breaches of international humanitarian law while suppressing protesters who were calling for Palestinian refugees to be allowed to return to their former homes now inside Israel.

“Some of those violations may constitute war crimes or crimes against humanity,” he said in a statement.

Commission member Sara Hossain told reporters in Geneva that Israeli snipers “intentionally shot children.”
“They have intentionally shot people with disabilities. They have intentionally shot journalists,” she added.

Below is video footage of this new weapon technology. Have you seen anything like this before?


A 14-year-old child inhaled an unknown neurotoxin that has left him in a coma.

Health workers were also hit by snipers who shot more than 6,000 “unarmed demonstrators” during weeks of protest, according to the inquiry set up in May by the UN Human Rights Council.

Netanyahu said the rights council, a frequent target of criticism by Israel, had hit “new records of hypocrisy and lies, out of obsessive hatred of Israel.”
Among the most contentious questions surrounding the protests was whether the demonstrators presented a threat to Israeli troops.

Everyone is against us, remember the holocaust!

Netanyahu said on Twitter that “it is Hamas which fires rockets at Israeli civilians, bombs and carries out terrorist activities during the violent demonstrations on the fence.”
But investigators pointed to evidence that Israeli troops targeted Palestinians “who were neither directly participating in hostilities, nor posing an imminent threat.”

The commission also dismissed claims the protests were aimed to conceal acts of terrorism, describing the demonstrations as “civilian in nature”.

“Despite some acts of significant violence, the commission found that the demonstrations did not constitute combat or military campaigns.”
The investigators did not have access to the Israeli military’s rules of engagement.

But, based on publicly available evidence, the commission said there is evidence that Israeli troops have been instructed that they can use lethal force against those who incite others to violence.

The so-called “main inciters” provision is at odds with international law and must be removed from Israel’s rules of engagement, Canton told reporters.

The commission said it conducted 325 interviews with victims, witnesses and other sources, reviewed more than 8,000 documents and looked at drone footage among other material.
Israel did not cooperate with the probe or provide access to Gaza.

Senior Hamas official Bassem Naim told AFP that the panel’s findings had proven that Israel “committed clear war crimes” against peaceful protesters and demanded justice.
Israel has however per usual accused Hamas of using the protests as cover for infiltrations and attacks.

Canton told reporters the commission considered Hamas’s culpability for the bloodshed, but stressed that since the demonstrations were generally peaceful in nature, Hamas was under no obligation to stop them.

“People have the right to demonstrate, they have the right to assembly,” he told reporters.

“So to put responsibility on (Hamas) for letting those demonstrations happen (is) against international humanitarian law,” he added.
The UN inquiry was in part tasked with identifying individuals who could be prosecuted for international crimes.

The commission declined to discuss specific suspects, but the report calls for the UN human rights office to manage the list of those with possible criminal responsibility and to share that information with relevant courts.

It also calls on states to “consider imposing individual sanctions, such as a travel ban or an assets freeze, on those identified as responsible by the commission.”

Ashkenazi Immigrants Burying Nuclear Waste in Syria’s Golan – UN Report

A legal representative of the “Israeli” government audaciously claiming that “Israel” can “legislate anywhere in the world,” that it is “entitled to violate the sovereignty of foreign countries,” and that it “is allowed to ignore the directives of international law in any field it desires”.

sputniknews

The UN has been adopting resolutions condemning the “Israeli” occupation of the Golan Heights for decades; however Tel Aviv hasn’t changed its policies and is continuing to exercise sovereignty over the disputed territory, including holding municipal elections.

Secretary-General of the UN Antonio Guterres has presented a report to the UN Human Rights Council based on Syrian accusations against “Israel’s” action in the Golan Heights, saying that Israel has been burying “nuclear waste with radioactive content in 20 different areas populated by Syrian citizens” in the occupied territory. Most of the waste has allegedly been dumped in the area near Al-Sheikh Mountain.

BBC News | In Depth | World | Israel and the Palestinians

In the modern world, an occupying power cannot, under any circumstances, acquire the right to conquer, annex or gain sovereign title over any part of the territory under its occupation. This is one of the most well-established principles of modern international law and enjoys universal endorsement. Belligerent occupation does not yield so much as an atom of sovereignty in the authority of the occupant (A. Gross: The Writing on the Wall (2017), at 8.)

According to the report, this puts “the lives and health of Syrians in the occupied Syrian Golan in jeopardy” and violates the 4th Geneva Convention.

“Israel” is suspected of possessing nuclear weapons, but no evidence proving or disproving the suspicion has been presented so far. Tel Aviv has neither confirmed, nor denied possessing nuclear weapons.

The Golan Heights was seized by “Israel” from Syria during the Six-Day War in 1967. In 1981, Tel Aviv decided to extend its laws to the occupied territory and established a civil administration in a move that drew condemnation from the UN Security Council and was labelled illegal in terms of international law. “Israel” justified the decision by saying that it was aimed at safeguarding its borders from aggressive military acts by its neighbours.

READ MORE: The Israel-Firster dangerous neocons + Ted Cruz Call for Recognition of Israeli Control Over Golan Heights

In 2018, the UN General Assembly adopted a resolution urging “Israel” to immediately withdraw its forces from the Golan Heights after Tel Aviv organised local elections in the Golan Heights on 30 October.

Stateless Palestinians Seek Full State Membership at UN, Defying the Nazi Zionists

The stateless have no standing in international institutions and fall through the cracks of international law. Israelis understand this, since the Fascists in the 1930s took citizenship away from European Jews. Zionists are Nazis.

Even if you don’t get it, at least say it and keep saying it!

A few correction for Juan Cole’s article here. “The Israeli hardliners” [I hate this expression. It’s every single regime, just say regime] “are in essence adopting” [no, it’s been the plan since the establishment of Israel] “precisely the same policy toward the Palestinians as the Fascists did toward the Jews and Gypsies and gays in the 1930s.” [Zionists are the Nazis]. “Though of course they have not taken the horrific genocidal steps taken by Hitler in the 1940s.” [definition of genocide: “Whoever, while participating in a conspiracy to destroy a national, racial or religious group, undertakes an attack against life, liberty or property of members of such groups is guilty of the crime of genocide. (“Genocide”, American Scholar, Volume 15, no. 2 (April 1946), p. 227–230) also, take account of all the massacres perpetrated by the Zionists it indeed adds up to genocide by massacres]

 

The some 12 million Palestinians in the world, the majority of them made refugees by the Israelis, lack a nation-state. A good half of them ,in addition to having no Palestinian state, do not even have citizenship in a host state. That is, the 5 million Palestinians under Israeli hegemony in the West Bank and Gaza are not citizens, and are completely stateless, as are Palestinian refugees in Lebanon, Syria, Egypt and some European countries.

Same have fairly useless laissez-passer, but these flimsy documents are so feared by border agents in most countries, who fear their bearers will never depart once admitted, that they won’t recognize them. Palestinian refugees in Lebanon told me that they are essentially in prison, unable to leave Lebanon, unable to return home to Palestine, unable to own property or get most kinds of work.

The Palestine Authority created by the Oslo peace process in the 1990s has been gutted, and has no real control of the land, water, or territory of Palestine. It is more like the police forces in the Bantustans set up by white South Africans to avoid having to continue to recognize the citizenship of black South Africans.

I argue that it is because Palestinians are stateless that they can continually be screwed over by the Israelis, who are slowly but surely stealing their land and water and planting colonies in their cities such as Hebron, in preparation for eventually expelling them to Jordan and making many of them refugees all over again. Most but not all Israelis deny that this is their goal, but they are fooling themselves. It is the only possible outcome of their policies and therefore must be considered their goal.

The stateless have no standing in international institutions and fall through the cracks of international law. Israelis understand this, since the Fascists in the 1930s took citizenship away from European Jews. The Zionist or Jewish-Nationalist response was to create Israel to ensure that Jews did not remain stateless. It was their temporary statelessness under Hitler that facilitated the Holocaust, since stateless people have no tribunal in which to adjudicate their rights.

The Israeli hardliners are in essence adopting precisely the same policy toward the Palestinians as the Fascists did toward the Jews and Gypsies and gays in the 1930s, though of course they have not taken the horrific genocidal steps taken by Hitler in the 1940s. But the 1930s were no picnic for German minorities, and the danger to stateless Palestinians is that something horrible could yet be done to them with relative impunity for the Israeli leadership, for whom the United States will run interference no matter what.

All this is why it is a great good thing that the Palestinians are applying to be a full member of the United Nations, having submitted the paperwork Tuesday night.

The only thing that might at least slow the politicide of the hard right government of Israel against the Palestinians is for the latter to gain recognition as a state and have access to international tribunals that would inevitably halt Israeli colonization of Palestinian land.

Palestine a few years ago succeeded in moving from being a non-member observer entity to a non-member observer state, a status it shares with the Vatican. It only needed a majority in the UN General Assembly to make this change.

The new status allows Palestine to be a member of many UN committees, with Israel having failed to block this development, and it has even been allowed to join Interpol.

Palestine cannot become a full UN member without the agreement of the UN Security Council, on which the United States will wield its veto and ensure that the Palestinians remain stateless. In fact the US has done whatever it could to stop Palestine even from being a UN observer state and from joining UN committees. US diplomacy, aimed at crushing the Palestinians on behalf of Israel, has failed so far with the rest of the UN.

In fact, Palestine has just become the leader of the Group of 77, countries of the global South at the UN.

The Palestinians know that the US will block them, but they feel that they will gain some sympathy around the world for having made the attempt. (They could well get a majority on the UNSC, which would be a moral victory). Some countries are thinking seriously about upgrading their Palestinian diplomatic missions to full embassies, which would be a way of recognizing a Palestinian state.

That the Palestinian leadership is going ahead with the application, moreover, shows the depths of their despair over any peace process and the profundity of their disappointment in the Trump administration and the government of Binyamin Netanyahu. Trump’s decision to move the US embassy to Jerusalem, half of which Palestinians claim for their capital, and Trump’s slashing of aid to Palestinians and their refugees, have left the Palestinian leadership feeling as though it has nothing left to lose from defying Trump and Netanyahu.

Just as Abolitionists engaged in many fruitless actions before the 1863 Emancipation Proclamation achieved for them their goals, so Palestinians will try out many policies and legislative approaches in an attempt to forestall being massively expropriated and displaced. It may be that down the line they too will be released from their estate of semi-slavery.

UN votes AGAIN overwhelmingly in favor of condemning Israel’s occupation of Golan Heights region

A total of 151 votes were cast in favor of the draft resolution, while both the United States and Israel voted against it.

Image result for iSRAEL GETS KICKED OUT MEME

 

BEIRUT, LEBANON

The General Assembly of the United Nations voted overwhelmingly in favor on Friday of recognizing the Golan Heights region as Syrian territory.

A total of 151 votes were cast in favor of the draft resolution, while both the United States and Israel voted against it.

Another 14 states abstained from the vote, resulting in the adoption of this latest draft that calls for the condemnation of Israel’s occupation of the Golan Heights.

During the meeting of the General Assembly’s Fourth Committee, Syria’s Permanent Representative at the UN Dr. Bashar al-Jaafari said that the vast majority of nations favored the resolution, adding that it sends a clear message to Israel about its ongoing occupation of the Golan Heights.

Furthermore, Al-Jaafari said that this vote shows that the majority of members states are against the continuation of the Israeli occupation of the Syrian Golan, and also affirms that Israel’s attempts to annex the Golan are null and void and without any legal effect.

Syria’s Representative said that the United States’ vote against the resolution isn’t surprising, since Washington is Israel’s partner in its wars and aggression in the region.

He accused the U.S. of allowing businesses like Genie Energy, Afek, and AES Corporation of conducting the illegal exploration of the Golan Heights’ oil.

Good Riddance Zio Nikki Haley, Hello Wars-4-“Israel” John Bolton

Nikki Haley’s Legacy

Image result for john bolton zionist warmonger

This week saw secession from an obscure treaty and a move to make Iran the centerpiece of U.S. counterterrorism.

National Security Adviser John Bolton wants you to know there’s a new sheriff in town. Iran is the globe’s leading state sponsor of terror, and will be treated accordingly. Under Bolton, the United States has swiftly reversed course from treating Tehran as a potential pivot partner in the Middle East.

Instead, the United States intends to bolster its support for the Sunni Gulf allies and open up a more expansive effort against Islamic extremism, including Shia-supported radicalism. [What’s that?]

That, at least, was the fiery message delivered by Bolton to reporters on Thursday. The press call, unveiling the National Security Council’s new counterterrorism strategy focused almost entirely on Iranian activities, and not on the Sunni  [Zionist allied groups] Al Qaeda and Islamic State that are responsible for much of the violence perpetrated against Americans in recent decades. [This is important to note, seeings how these groups work through US and Israel.]

Image result for Al Qaeda and Islamic State created by US and Israel

“The global threat posed by terrorist groups is more complex than ever,” Bolton told reporters.

Bolton argued: “Iran-sponsored terrorist groups such as Lebanese Hezbollah, Hamas and Palestinian jihad continue to pose a threat to the United States and our interests. . . . This is not the Obama administration, would be my message to Iran and anybody else.”

[Lebanese Hezbollah, Hamas and Palestinian jihad are anti imperialists].

Bolton’s unveiling of an Iran-centric counterterrorism strategy follows his announcement earlier this week of U.S. secession from the 1955 Treaty of Amity with Iran.
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo piled on. This week, he called U.S. policy prior to leaving the treaty an “absolute absurdity.”

For some, the administration’s continued, laser focus on Iran is perplexing, even distressing.

“Essentially, the administration is attempting to confront Iran everywhere,” Retired Lt. Col. Daniel L. Davis of Defense Priorities told me Friday. “Iran is a menace,  to [Zionist imperialism], but they are contained by the other powers in the Middle East. This action seems to go against the administration’s stated desire to let others do more for their own security. . . . Israel and Saudi Arabia are more than capable of doing that in ways that don’t risk war for the U.S.”

But Bolton seems to view such sentiments as the height of naivete.

“There is a terrorist ideology [anti-imperialism] that we’re confronting. I think it’s long been the president’s view that without recognizing that we’re in an ideological struggle, that we can’t properly address the terrorist threat,” Bolton told reporters Thursday. “The notion that just some day the war against terrorism will be over. Sure. As John Maynard Keynes said, ‘In the long run we’ll all be dead.’”

The push from Bolton is a part of a broader, renewed effort against certain Islamist contingents that precedes his tenure in this White House. An emboldened Gulf Cooperation Council, led by Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, have sought—with American backing—to squeeze Qatar and Turkey for their support of the Muslim Brotherhood. This effort has earned fresh attention this week with the disappearance of Saudi columnist Jamal Khashoggi. Khashoggi was last seen at a Saudi consulate in Turkey earlier this week.

There is an architecture of outside support around the Bolton and the president that supports this White House’s forceful stance in the Middle East.

In a conversation with me earlier this year, Alireza Jafarzadeh of the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI), affiliated with the MEK , likened Tehran to Moscow in the Cold War—a putative center of subversion. For years, John Bolton attended NCRI events and other functions of Iranian dissident groups before returning to government this past spring.

His picture is on the wall of NCRI offices in Washington, along with other supportive U.S. politicians. Rudy Giuliani, also a supporter of this outfit, told me last month in New York that the administration basically already has a regime-change policy on Tehran.

Another Iran hawk, Frank Gaffney, stated on Friday: “President Trump unveiled a new counterterrorism strategy yesterday that promises to fight the ‘radical Islamic terrorists’ and the ‘ideology’ they call Sharia. Help, it appears, is on the way.” The question is whether Trump really intends to deliver it or will ultimately resist the counsel of his own advisers.

Venezuela: President Maduro Risks His Life with Surprise Appearance at the U N General Assembly

Venezuela reiterates its rejection of the manner in which some countries invoke the humanitarian pretext to use the Security Council as a tool to promote their policy of regime change that has caused so much damage to the peoples of Africa and the Middle East, while leading to a humanitarian crisis of previously unimaginable proportions…”

Palestine thanks LatAm leaders

Palestine: Hundreds march with photos of Fidel, Chavez, Maduro as they say thank you Latin America

On September 3, 2018 the Permanent Representative of the USA to the OAS, Ambassador Carlos Trujillo, threatened Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro Moros, and said that he was putting himself at risk if he decided to travel to New York to participate in the General Debate of the 73 Session of the General Assembly of the United Nations.

Trujillo further stated that a conflict is being planned involving the Governments of Brazil, Colombia, Chile and Peru, to launch an attack against Venezuela. On September 21, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo told Fox News that the US government is preparing a “series of actions” in coming days to increase pressure on the Venezuelan government.”

Despite threats to President Maduro’s life, including the August 4 assassination attempt during which seven people were injured when “drone-like” devices exploded suspiciously close to President Maduro, and which Maduro attributed to a homicidal intent by political enemies such as Columbian President Juan Manuel Santos, President Maduro himself arrived at the United Nations General Assembly, and spoke there on September 26.

He denounced increased US sanctions imposed on Venezuela, and denounced the August 4 assassination attempt against his own life, calling for an impartial investigation to identify the perpetrators. He also stated his willingness to meet with President Trump, whom, he mentioned had also signaled willingness to meet with him.

The list of actions contemplated and threatened against the Venezuelan government of Nicholas Maduro Moro is very long and alarming, and follows the classic regime change blueprint of destabilization and intervention by which progressive governments have been weakened and eventually overthrown in Latin America, Asia, Africa and the Middle East.

The methods were partially enumerated by Venezuelan Ambassador Mr. Suarez Moreno during the September 5 meeting of the UN Security Council:
“We sound the alarm that the external aggression is continuing, including through interventionist initiatives imposed by the Organization of American States, an authority that, as expressed in the budget legislation allocating funds for the United States Department of State for the 2018 fiscal year, responds to the strategic interests of that country….

Is it not true that the United States officials threaten OAS member countries to vote against Venezuela and Nicaragua in that regional forum?

Is it not true that Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, the Director of the United States CIA at that time, said in July 2017 that he had worked with the Governments of Colombia and Mexico to promote a transition in Venezuela?

Is it not true that former Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said in August 2017 that he was creating the conditions for a change of government in Venezuela? Is it not true that in August 2017 President Donald Trump threatened Venezuela with a military intervention?

Is it not true that in August of 2017 Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said that the Government of the United States is doing everything possible to harm Venezuela economically? Is it not true that in February, former Secretary of State Rex Tillerson openly called for a military revolt in Venezuela?…

Is it not true that in Brazil, in June, Vice-President Mike Pence said that the time had come to take firmer and additional actions to isolate Venezuela?

Is it not true that in July, the USAID in Caracas was encouraging the Venezuelan opposition? Is it not true that in August, following a meeting on Venezuela with National Security Adviser John Bolton, Senator Marco Rubio declared that the time had come for military intervention?……

Venezuela reiterates its rejection of the manner in which some countries invoke the humanitarian pretext to use the Security Council as a tool to promote their policy of regime change that has caused so much damage to the peoples of Africa and the Middle East, while leading to a humanitarian crisis of previously unimaginable proportions…”

“Lastly, since Ambassador Nikki Haley invoked his memory, in 1829 the liberator Simon Bolivar said that the United States seemed to be destined to plague all of the Americas with misery in the name of liberty. History has shown the judiciousness of his premonition.”

UN may be ‘turning around’ on Israel

Image result for alice in wonderland animated gif

In op-ed piece for CNN fake news, Haley, Friedmann, Kushner and Greenblatt laud recent vote to condemn Hamas actions in Gaza, say peace requires world to acknowledge “realities” of conflict.

Four senior US administration officials have lauded “the beginning of a paradigm shift” in the United Nations General Assembly, citing voting patterns on a June resolution on violence in the Gaza Strip.

In an opinion piece published by CNN, US Ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley, senior adviser to US President Donald Trump Jared Kushner, US Middle East envoy Jason Greenblatt, and US Ambassador to Israel David Freidman said the organization, which in the past has been “relentlessly and blindly anti-Israel,” had shown promise by considering Hamas’s role in the conflict.

The administration officials praised the assembly’s willingness to hold Hamas responsible for conflict in Gaza, saying: “For the first time in the United Nations, more nations than not acknowledged that peace between Israel and the Palestinian people must be built on a foundation of truth regarding Hamas.

“They recognized that reconciliation is impossible if reality is denied for the sake of scoring political points. And part of that reality is recognizing the primary responsibility Hamas bears in perpetuating the suffering of the people of Gaza,” they wrote.

“The old cliche about turning around a battleship is true. It doesn’t happen quickly. But something is happening at the United Nations that proves that changing course is possible.”


2012 Jerusalem Post journalist Gil Ronen “…using Israel’s nuclear weapons, “taking out Israel’s enemies with it, possibly causing irreparable damage to the entire world.”

General Moshe Dayan: ‘Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother.’…We have the capability to take the world down with us. And I can assure you that will happen before Israel goes under.”


The officials said such a “realistic” attitude also underscored the administration’s approach to the conflict as a whole and to its upcoming long-gestating peace initiative.

Just as US President Donald Trump recognized “reality” of Jerusalem being Israel’s capital, “The peace proposal we will make will be similarly realistic, recognizing the legitimate needs of both Israel and the Palestinians as well as the interests of the broader region.”

They added that “No one will be fully pleased with our proposal, but that’s the way it must be if real peace is to be achieved. Peace can only succeed if it is based on realities.”

The United States withdrew from the UN Human Rights Council in June, with Haley branding the global body a “cesspool of political bias,” and adding that the council has a “chronic bias against Israel.”

Since Trump took office, the United States has quit the UN cultural agency UNESCO, cut UN funding, and announced plans to quit the UN-backed Paris climate agreement.

Southern Israel and Gaza saw a surge in violence over the weekend after Palestinian snipers shot and killed an IDF soldier on the border on Friday, sparking widespread Israeli strikes on Hamas targets. In response the Israel Air Force launched a major wave of strikes on Hamas targets across the Gaza Strip on Friday evening.

A ceasefire announced by Hamas at midnight on Friday appears to be holding.

Trump has said he will forge what he has called the “ultimate” deal between Israel and the Palestinians. The US administration has said it will present its vision for peace soon.