The UN General Assembly must be pushed to do what it can, including a resolution for sanctions against Israel. Could directing protests at the UN help make that happen?
Sam, do you think it would make a difference if US citizens wrote emails and letters to the UN representatives of other nations in the list, or are emails coming from citizens of other nations generally ignored? I'm happy to press the US staff but I'd like to do more if it will help. I've signed the CodePink petition.
Recommending Responsible Parties Be Held Responsible, on Malaysia Foundation:
Re USA, by its vetoes, its subversions including unbased 'nonbinding' labels for binding resolutions and behind the scenes muscling, the USA chronically violates the preamble, purposes, principles, and the spirit of the UN Charter, apparently to insinuate that elusive whatever we say it is 'rules based order'. In this situation and historically the USA supplies plentiful evidence for the UNSC to progressively a) override its veto; b) remove its individual veto power, c) at the least relieve it of its permanent member status if not eject it from the UNSC entirely, d) apply sanctions, each privilege removed until compliance is demonstrated for a designated timeframe, when privileges may be restored with acceptable performance in ascending priority (least privileges first), with consequences for backsliding.
Re Palestine and Israel, Dr. Ralph Wilde has detailed the international law on self-determination and use of force applicable in this case - in a Feb. 2024 presentation to the ICJ and multiple online briefs, papers, and presentations. Regarding relative simplicity and practicality, Dr. Wilde clearly states Israel's allowable legal action and timeframe (with his other elucidations, seemingly swallowed by a black hole for all the public discussion they've received), " The international law of self-determination and the use of force requires an immediate end to the occupation of the Palestinian West Bank and Gaza."
Dr.Ralph Wilde had the very best dissertation at the ICJ in my opinion ,although all were very good and valid .Thanks for the PDF, copied for my files .
Thanks for the support. I think Dr. Wilde's argument is jaw dropping in its relative simplicity, apparent legal foundation, and immediate application. It cuts through other convoluted action proposals. If the real intent is to save lives, not just political posturing that effectively lets the massacre continue. Are we so propagandized by complexity that we can't understand his language? The ICJ needs to rule he's right and tell the UNSC to do its job. Immediately.
Always very truthful information from Sam Husseini .
The establishment of the state of Israel was through much help from Chaim Weizmann , prior to the end of WWII . After the 6,000,000 were said to have been victims of the Nazis ,it was much easier for the United Nations to declare a state for the Jewish people in Palestine . But truth be said ,the state was established through ethnic cleansing of the existing Palestinian people ,called the Nakba .The forced expansion of the state has been ongoing ever since and here we are today ,ongoing for everyone to see televised. When will humanity finally say ENOUGH !
And Dr. Wilde articulates the original violation of Palestine's self-determination by the 1920's British 'temporary trust'. Like pregnancy reportedly, once one sees, it can be found everywhere:
". . . The mandate system was devised at the Paris Peace Conference with little prior analysis that might have given a clear answer as to its meaning. . . . in Palestine the administration consisted of British personnel. . . . The mandate system was criticized at the time as a continuation of colonial rule in a new guise. Feeding this criticism was the fact that in Great Britain’s governance structure, the Palestine Administration fell under the supervision of the Secretary for the Colonies. . . . "
If I remember right, Dr. Wilde also questions the initial Balfour letter. Yet who effectively questions any of these points? Because they're unquestionable?
Sam, do you think it would make a difference if US citizens wrote emails and letters to the UN representatives of other nations in the list, or are emails coming from citizens of other nations generally ignored? I'm happy to press the US staff but I'd like to do more if it will help. I've signed the CodePink petition.
I think it would be good for US citizens to respectfully urge other countries' govs to do Uniting For Peace and other things.
Will do, sir. Thank you for all you are doing for Palestine.
P.S. I sent letters to everyone on the ICJ, since THAT might work.
Recommending Responsible Parties Be Held Responsible, on Malaysia Foundation:
Re USA, by its vetoes, its subversions including unbased 'nonbinding' labels for binding resolutions and behind the scenes muscling, the USA chronically violates the preamble, purposes, principles, and the spirit of the UN Charter, apparently to insinuate that elusive whatever we say it is 'rules based order'. In this situation and historically the USA supplies plentiful evidence for the UNSC to progressively a) override its veto; b) remove its individual veto power, c) at the least relieve it of its permanent member status if not eject it from the UNSC entirely, d) apply sanctions, each privilege removed until compliance is demonstrated for a designated timeframe, when privileges may be restored with acceptable performance in ascending priority (least privileges first), with consequences for backsliding.
Re Palestine and Israel, Dr. Ralph Wilde has detailed the international law on self-determination and use of force applicable in this case - in a Feb. 2024 presentation to the ICJ and multiple online briefs, papers, and presentations. Regarding relative simplicity and practicality, Dr. Wilde clearly states Israel's allowable legal action and timeframe (with his other elucidations, seemingly swallowed by a black hole for all the public discussion they've received), " The international law of self-determination and the use of force requires an immediate end to the occupation of the Palestinian West Bank and Gaza."
https://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/sites/laws/files/ralph_wilde_palestine_policy_brief.pdf
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EUrLQES3TmY
These for now.
Dr.Ralph Wilde had the very best dissertation at the ICJ in my opinion ,although all were very good and valid .Thanks for the PDF, copied for my files .
Thanks for the support. I think Dr. Wilde's argument is jaw dropping in its relative simplicity, apparent legal foundation, and immediate application. It cuts through other convoluted action proposals. If the real intent is to save lives, not just political posturing that effectively lets the massacre continue. Are we so propagandized by complexity that we can't understand his language? The ICJ needs to rule he's right and tell the UNSC to do its job. Immediately.
Always very truthful information from Sam Husseini .
The establishment of the state of Israel was through much help from Chaim Weizmann , prior to the end of WWII . After the 6,000,000 were said to have been victims of the Nazis ,it was much easier for the United Nations to declare a state for the Jewish people in Palestine . But truth be said ,the state was established through ethnic cleansing of the existing Palestinian people ,called the Nakba .The forced expansion of the state has been ongoing ever since and here we are today ,ongoing for everyone to see televised. When will humanity finally say ENOUGH !
And Dr. Wilde articulates the original violation of Palestine's self-determination by the 1920's British 'temporary trust'. Like pregnancy reportedly, once one sees, it can be found everywhere:
". . . The mandate system was devised at the Paris Peace Conference with little prior analysis that might have given a clear answer as to its meaning. . . . in Palestine the administration consisted of British personnel. . . . The mandate system was criticized at the time as a continuation of colonial rule in a new guise. Feeding this criticism was the fact that in Great Britain’s governance structure, the Palestine Administration fell under the supervision of the Secretary for the Colonies. . . . "
https://www.oxfordbibliographies.com/display/document/obo-9780199796953/obo-9780199796953-0200.xml
If I remember right, Dr. Wilde also questions the initial Balfour letter. Yet who effectively questions any of these points? Because they're unquestionable?