Category Archives: United Nations

Time to Define Banning Jews From Living Somewhere as Antisemitic

Posted on by
28

The German government voted in May 2019 to officially label the boycott, divestment and sanctions (B.D.S.) of Israel movement as antisemitic.

The resolution entitled “Resisting the BDS movement decisively –fighting antisemitism,” calls on the German government to “cease providing premises and facilities under the administration of the Bundestag to organizations that use anti-Semitic terms or question Israel’s right to exist.” This marks the first time a major European parliament has defined the BDS movement as antisemitic.

It is highly appropriate for the European country which led the charge to annihilate the Jews in the 1930’s and 1940’s to lead the way for curtailing the mainstreaming of Jew-hatred today. The noxious B.D.S. antisemitism is being championed by the far-left, Islamic radicals and the alt-right, so Germany’s voice in protesting the activity as it recalls its own actions during the Holocaust is a clarion call for the the world to eradicate pernicious evil at its roots.

Nazis labeling Jewish stores for boycott in 1933. An den Fenstern j¸discher Geschte werden von Nationalsozialisten Plakate mit der Aufforderung “Deutsche, wehrt euch, kauft nicht bei Juden” angebracht.

It is similarly time for the United Nations to call out the Jew-hatred in its ranks and acknowledge and label that the banning of Jews from living anywhere is antisemitic.

The UN devolved into its current antisemitic state over the decades from the 1950’s to 1970’s, as many Muslim countries hostile to the Jewish State were admitted as members, and the former Nazi Kurt Waldheim served as the leader of the United Nations from 1972 to 1981. Over Waldheim’s watch, the organization passed many anti-Israel and anti-Semitic resolutions. They included:

  • UN Resolution 3236 (1974) declaring that Palestinians have – uniquely among all people in the world – an inalienable right to sovereignty and to return to a house where an ancestor lived (even if they were just renters and lived there for a short time).
  • UN Resolution 3379 (1975) declaring “that Zionism is a form of racism and racial discrimination.“

The United States helped repeal UN Res. 3379 in 1991, but the absurdity of UN Res. 3236 lives on, perpetuating a simmering battle between Arabs and Jews.

The absurd resolution is matched by explicitly antisemitic resolutions, such as UN Security Council 2334 (2016). By liberally switching between the concept of “settlements” and “settlers” as well as “Israel” and “Jews,” the UN pushed forward the notion that Jews should be forbidden to live in huge swathes of their homeland, including their holiest city of Jerusalem. An Israeli Arab moving to the West Bank is considered a non-issue, while a Jew buying an apartment in the Old City of Jerusalem is considered “a flagrant violation under international law.” It’s outrageous, it’s antisemitic, and it’s considered perfectly acceptable by the UN today.

In a similar vein, the UN has refused to comment of the Palestinian Authority law which calls for the death sentence for any Arab selling land to Jews in eastern Jerusalem and all lands east of the Green Line (EGL), as the UN would rather state that the PA is a credible partner for peace. Imagine the uproar at the UN if Israel had a law which forbade Arabs from living in the country.

Perhaps, just as Germany took the lead in labeling the B.D.S. movement as antisemitic, Russia should take a leadership role in noting that the banning of Jews from owning property and living in certain areas is antisemitic, to acknowledge its role in limiting Jews to just the Pale of Settlement. Maybe the United Kingdom will admit that evicting all Jews from the city of Hebron in 1929, and from all of England in 1290 was wrong. Better still, the UK should state clearly that it fiercely objects and opposes the currently outstanding terms of the Treaty of Utecht which bans Jews from living in Gibraltar, and together with Spain which drafted the language, officially remove it.

How can we expect the world to recognize the antisemitism of BDS, when it hasn’t clearly condemned the laws which ban Jews from living in certain locations?

Related First.One.Through articles:

The Long History of Dictating Where Jews Can Live Continues

The EU’s Choice of Labels: “Made in West Bank” and “Anti-Semite”

Anti-“Settlements” is Anti-Semitism

When Hate Returns

The Legal Israeli Settlements

Marking November 29 as The International Day of Solidarity with Jews Living East of the Green Line

Tolerance at the Temple Mount

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: FirstOne Through Israel Analysis and FirstOneThrough

The United Nations Tackles Fake News Instead of Fake Rights

Posted on by
2

On April 30, 2019, several speakers took the floor at the United Nations to discuss the “Special Information Programme on the Question of Palestine.” Various countries including Israel, the United States, Iran, Russia and Trinidad and Tobago discussed whether there was too much fake news being disseminated and whether the U.N. was promoting a false narrative in its news reports.


Panel at the United Nations regarding “Palestine”
(photo: First.One.Through)

Regrettably, the discussion solely focused on the technology and languages related to the “Question of Palestine” without addressing the fundamental flaw of the U.N. initiative which is the fake rights awarded to the Stateless Arabs of Palestine (SAPs) which have not been afforded to any other people on the planet or contained in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

As detailed in the article “Time to Dissolve Key Principles of the Inalienable Rights of Palestinians,” people only have a right to self-determination which should be a goal for the U.N. as it relates to the SAPs. However, no people have a right to sovereignty, regardless of UN Resolution 3376 of November 10, 1975. Do the Kurds have a right to their own country? Why is there no UN resolution for them when they are an actual distinct group of people as opposed to the SAPs who were just a collection of various people (different religions including Sunni, Shia, Druze, Christian, and born in different countries including Iraq, Egypt, Palestine, etc.) living in the same region at a particular moment in time (1946 to May 1948)? One could just as easily argue that New Yorkers from the 1970’s deserve sovereignty.

Similarly, the November 1975 UN resolution on behalf of the SAPs declared that they had “inalienable rights” in which descendants of people who worked and lived in a particular town could return to such ancestor’s house. That’s an absurdity. Why should the U.N. promote the rights of SAPs whose grandparents rented a house in Jaffa in the 1940’s over a Palestinian who now has citizenship in Chile whose grandparents actually owned a house back then?

On the very same day that the U.N. passed the illegitimate Resolution 3376, it passed UN Resolution 3379 which determined “zionism is a form of racism and racial discrimination.” It took until December 1991 and constant urging by the United States and Israel for the U.N. to repeal Res. 3379. Regrettably, no similar initiative has been launched to repeal Resolution 3376, so the theater of the absurd plays out today with various ambassadors arguing about how best to spread the propaganda that Palestinians have rights to sovereignty and to move into a house which a grandparent rented 75 years ago.

If it weren’t for the 1991 repeal of the other antisemitic resolution, would the U.N. be hosting panels on how to best smear Zionism on the world stage? Yes, I’m sure it would.

Related First.One.Through articles:

The United Nations Bias Between Jews and Palestinians Regarding Property Rights

Marking November 29 as The International Day of Solidarity with Jews Living East of the Green Line

When the Democrats Opposed the Palestinian “Right of Return”

The Palestinian State I Oppose

The Many Lies of Jimmy Carter

A Response to Rashid Khalidi’s Distortions on the Balfour Declaration

Heritage, Property and Sovereignty in the Holy Land

Israel’s Colonial Neighbors from Arabia

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: FirstOne Through Israel Analysis and FirstOneThrough

 

The Press Are Not Guardians of the Galaxy

Posted on by
7

There are many freedoms which are cherished in the United States, as outlined in the Bill of Rights. These freedoms were specifically enumerated to curtail the power of the government. Key provisions reserved for individuals can be found in the very first of the ten amendments made to the U.S. Constitution:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”

Individuals were given the right to speak their minds, to associate with people of their own choosing and to publicly write and disseminate materials without government interference. The government was specifically limited in forcing upon people a particular narrative.

That was in 1791.

Several items have changed the way Americans and (much of the world) view these key principles of freedom:

  • The Internet and social media have enabled people to have platforms which can reach every corner of the world, making each person potentially more influential than the mainstream media
  • The mainstream media’s business model has been collapsing as money from classifieds and advertising abandoned the press for those new media platforms like YouTube, Facebook and Twitter with greater reach, driving the remaining corporate media titans to become more partisan and inflammatory in their content to retain and attract viewership
  • Social media is not simply a soap box nor bulletin board, but includes a range of sophisticated algorithms which direct viewers towards a prioritized list of media to consume, making the platforms themselves powerful disseminaters of information

These first three points are critical to understanding the tension between the democratization of the press: how large media companies backed by large corporate advertising dollars are dissolving in the face of smaller and more niche sources of media. Those smaller media sources can survive as hobbies of individuals and can attract micro-audiences and some actually become larger than the historic media agencies.

Against this democratization of the press which has unfolded over the past two decades is the growth of global terrorism:

  • History has shown (the Holocaust) how propaganda can quickly descend into a genocide of innocent people prompting the introductions of hate speech laws which inherently limit free speech
  • World leaders and the press have presented their case that leading global terrorist organizations like the Islamic State and al Qaeda effectively recruited individuals online, and have pushed the social media platforms to remove the content of those organizations
  • Governments have similarly asked the social media platforms to alter their algorithms to intersperse a range of ideas to people who may be searching for niche extremist ideas

Lastly, in addition to the democratization of the press and growth of terrorism prompting governments to intervene in the business of social media, is the more general backdrop of society and how social media is currently used:

Taken together, governments and global organizations are infringing on many freedoms in the stated desired hope of promoting a more peaceful and inclusive society.

It sounds noble as a goal and problematic in practice. Limiting speech that incites violence is logical and lawful, but calling non-violent speech a form of illegal “microaggression” is an assault on the First Amendment. Perhaps a person could get over a very limited number of restrictions if the world would indeed become more peaceful. Perhaps, but that is beside the point here.

The issue is that the limitations on individual speech and associations online are being advanced while the mainstream media is becoming ever more inflammatory and biased. The dynamic that governments were held in check by a free press in a balance of power with the press acting as a guardian of the people is a principle which may have had a shelf life from 1791 to 2000, but no longer applies in a world where the people’s voices are just as loud.

Consider two statements made by the United Nations Secretary General António Guterres over the last few days:

On social media contributing to hatred and violence: “Around the world, we are seeing a disturbing groundswell of intolerance and hate-based violence targeting worshipers of many faiths. In recent days alone, a synagogue in the United States and a church in Burkina Faso have come under attack….

Parts of the Internet are becoming hothouses of hate, as like-minded bigots find each other online, and platforms serve to inflame and enable hate to go viral. As crime feeds on crime, and as vile views move from the fringes to the mainstream, I am profoundly concerned that we are nearing a pivotal moment in battling hatred and extremism.

That is why I have set in motion two urgent initiatives: devising a plan of action to fully mobilize the United Nations system’s response to tackling hate speech, led by my Special Representative on Genocide Prevention; and exploring how the United Nations can contribute in ensuring the safety of religious sanctuaries, an effort being led by my High Representative for the Alliance of Civilizations.”

On Freedom of the Press: “A free press is essential for peace, justice, sustainable development and human rights. No democracy is complete without access to transparent and reliable information. It is the cornerstone for building fair and impartial institutions, holding leaders accountable and speaking truth to power….

When media workers are targeted, societies as a whole pay a price. On World Press Freedom Day, I call on all to defend the rights of journalists, whose efforts help us to build a better world for all.“

The concepts that the head of the U.N. put forward taken together are ancient: the press is no longer the vehicle for “transparent and reliable information.” It is as jaundiced and bigoted as social media. Protecting the press while quashing social media would be the opposite of speaking truth to power; it would be empowering the press at the expense of the people, not in favor of the people.

Consider the leading mainstream media organization The New York Times. It’s portrayal of the Israeli-Arab Conflict is beyond biased. It posts articles and cartoons vilifying Jews and the Jewish State over and again while it whitewashes the antisemitism of Palestinians. Should the bigots of The NY Times control the narrative while individuals on social media explaining Muslim antisemitism be silenced? Who gets to decide if liberal or conservative ideas have a right to be shared or censored?

Journalists are no longer limited to the large press organizations but can be found throughout social media. Their rights must be defended as vigorously as any.

A free press without free speech for all would be a tyranny of the worst sort.

logo of First.One.Through

Related First.One.Through articles:

Uncomfortable vs. Dangerous Free Speech

New York Times Confusion on Free Speech

Social Media’s “Fake News” and Mainstream Media’s Half-Truths

Journalists in the Middle East

Israel’s Freedom of the Press; New York Times “Nonsense”

The Free Speech Nickel

The Fault in Our Tent: The Limit of Acceptable Speech

Selective Speech

We Should Not Pay for Your First Amendment Rights

The UN is Watering the Seeds of Anti-Jewish Hate Speech for Future Massacres

The Noose and the Nipple

I’m Offended, You’re Dead

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: FirstOne Through Israel Analysis and FirstOneThrough

The United Nations Bias Between Jews and Palestinians Regarding Property Rights

Posted on by
5

On December 10, 1948, the United Nations passed the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. In it, the global body sought to ensure that all people had basic human rights as laid out in the preamble:

“Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,”

Such rights afforded to all people included the right to own property as enumerated in Article 17:

“(1) Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others.
(2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property.”

With such understanding, it is worth delving into the rights of Jews and Arabs to own property in the holy land.

Jews Owning Property in the Holy Land

Even before the UDHR was codified, international law encouraged Jews to live and settle throughout Palestine, which at the time included areas which today are commonly called, Israel, the West Bank, Gaza and Jordan. The Mandate of Palestine of 1922 stated clearly the mission to “secure the establishment of the Jewish national home,” and encourage “close settlement by Jews on the land, including State lands and waste lands not required for public purposes.” Further, the law laid out that “[n]o discrimination of any kind shall be made between the inhabitants of Palestine on the ground of race, religion or language. No person shall be excluded from Palestine on the sole ground of his religious belief.”

International law stated that everyone – Jew, Arab and all others – could live throughout the land, but it was specifically Jews who were encouraged to settle the land and establish a national home throughout the entirety of the Palestine Mandate. Article 25 of the Mandate did allow the British to separate off the area east of the Jordan River (now known as Jordan), but it still forbade such entity from banning people from living and owning property because of their religion.

But that’s precisely what happened.

On September 23, 1922, the British separated that area into “Transjordan” and soon recognized a new government there. That government believed that Jews had no rights to own land. When Jordan invaded Israel in 1948 and took over the area now known as the “West Bank” and eastern Jerusalem, it evicted every Jew. When Jordan passed a nationality law in 1954, it specifically forbade the Jews from eastern Jerusalem and the West Bank from getting citizenship. The Jordanians also passed a law that made it a capital offense for any Arab to sell land to a Jew. The Palestinian Authority has proudly inherited and maintained that policy today.

And the world seemed to endorse this Jew-free formula.

Even beyond the dozens of Muslim states which refused to recognize the basic existence of Israel, in 2014, former US President Barack Obama chastised Jews for legally buying homes in the predominantly Arab section of eastern Jerusalem stating that the “US condemns the recent occupation of residential buildings in the neighborhood of Silwan by people whose agenda provokes tensions.” The inherent dignity of Jews to own property was viewed as secondary to the demands of the antisemitic Arab neighbors.

For Muslims nations, progressives and much of the world, the inalienable human right to own property did not cover Jews, and in their homeland, no less.

Arabs With Rights to Ancestors’ Homes

In stark contrast to Jews who uniquely have been determined as not worthy of basic human rights and dignity, the United Nations extended the property rights for Palestinian Arabs that do not exist for any other group of people.

On November 22, 1974 the UN General Assembly passed A/RES/3236 (XXIX) which granted Palestinian Arabs the rights to not just own property but the “inalienable right” to go actually “return” to homes and property where ancestors lived generations ago.

“2. Reaffirms also the inalienable right of the Palestinians to return to their homes and property from which they have been displaced and uprooted, and calls for their return;”

The concept was and remains without precedent. Do Americans have the right to return to homes in other continents where great grandparents lived 100 years ago? Even more outrageous, most of the local Arabs in Palestine did not own the house or land; it was mostly owned by wealthy people from other areas including Turkey and Syria. That is why the UNRWA definition of a “refugee” simply states that it is for “persons whose normal place of residence was Palestine,” not that they OWNED any property. Even more, the Palestinian “refugees” which concern the UN simply lived in Palestine between 1946 and 1948, with most having moved to the area from neighboring Arab lands in the preceding years.

Not surprisingly, the UN branded “Zionism is a form of racism,” and “a threat to world peace” just a year later as it pushed resolutions to eliminate Jewish rights and dignity while advancing those of the Arabs in their midst.

Jews have been uniquely stripped of their “inalienable rights” to purchase and own homes in the Jewish homeland, while Palestinian Arabs have been uniquely granted “inalienable rights” to move to houses and villages which no longer exist in a foreign country because ancestors once lived and worked there, even if they were just renting for a couple of years.

With the absurdity of such biased declarations, why should Israel pay any heed to the rantings of the rabidly antisemitic and biased body?

Related First.One.Through articles:

The Original Nakba: The Division of “TransJordan”

The Long History of Dictating Where Jews Can Live Continues

Time to Dissolve Key Principles of the “Inalienable Rights of Palestinians”

No Jews Allowed in Palestine

The Parameters of Palestinian Dignity

Compensation Fund for Palestinian Arabs’ and MENA Jews’ Lost Property

The United Nations Oxymoronic Care for Israel

The United Nations’ Adoption of Palestinians, Enables It to Only Find Fault With Israel

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: FirstOne Through Israel Analysis and FirstOneThrough


Homes in the Jewish Quarter of the Old City of Jerusalem,
a city which has been majority Jewish since the 1860’s

 

The United Nations Oxymoronic Care for Israel

Posted on by
3

The United Nations Special Coordinator for the Middle East Peace Process, Nickolay Mladenov, gave the UN Security Council a briefing on February 20, 2019. It included the following two sentences to conclude his introductory remarks:

“An international community that understands that the weaker party – the Palestinian people who have lived under occupation for more than fifty years – need our support more than ever.

“It should never be about Israel or Palestine, it should be about Israel and Palestine.“

The concluding comment is one that seemingly people on all sides of the conflict could support – establishing a framework that is both pro-Israel and pro-Palestinian; a scenario in which all of the parties are supported.


Nickolay Mladenov

But the immediately preceding comment makes clear that the aim of the UN is NOT to support both parties, but only “the weaker party – the Palestinian people.”

This sentiment rallies the alt-left, that the weaker party is always the one to be embraced, regardless of whether it is moral or ethical. Progressives therefore embrace such toxic notions that the Palestinian Authority is right to pay the families of Arab murderers of Israeli Jews, because the families of those murderers are poor and stateless. The evil is rationalized, normalized.

For the alt-left, it is an appalling blessing of murder. For the United Nations, it continues a long history of virulent anti-Zionist behavior.

Related First.One.Through articles:

Eyal Gilad Naftali Klinghoffer. The new Blood Libel.

The Liberals in Canada are Following Obama in Turning on Israel

The UN Never Demands Justice for Palestinian Killers

The United Nations Once Again “Encourages” Hamas

The Hollowness of the United Nations’ “All”

The United Nations’ Select Concern for Arson in the Middle East

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: FirstOne Through Israel Analysis and FirstOneThrough

The UN Never Demands Justice for Palestinian Killers

Posted on by
6

The United Nations Special Coordinator for Middle East Peace, Nickolay Mladenov, is forever busily tweeting and making statements about the violence in the Arab-Israel Conflict. Curiously, while he often condemns all acts of violence, he uses very different language when the attackers are either Israelis or Palestinians. When an Israeli commits the attack, Mladenov demands that the perpetrator be brought to justice, however, when a Palestinian commits the attack, all Mladenov can muster is a generic condemnation of terror.

Consider Mladenov’s Tweet on February 10, 2019 about the horrific intentional butchering of a teenage Israeli woman:

 16 hours ago

I’m appalled by the horrific murder of 19-year old , by a Palestinian perpetrator in . My deepest condolences to Ori’s family. There is no justification for violence and terror. Such brutal acts must be condemned by all.

While Mladenov condemned the violence and noted that a Palestinian was the perpetrator, he did not call for the Arab killer to be brought to justice. That is in sharp contrast to how Mladenov reacted towards violence from Israelis.

Here is Mladenov’s Tweet from January 26:

 Jan 26

Today’s violence in is shocking & unacceptable! must put an end to settler violence & bring those responsible to justice. My thoughts & prayers go out to the family of the man killed & those injured. All must condemn violence, stand up to terror.

Not only did Mladenov not demand that the Palestinian killer be brought to justice, he didn’t demand that the Palestinian Authority stop the violence.

When it came to Arab-on-Arab violence, as on January 3, 2019 when Palestinian PM Rami Hamdallah’s motorcade came under attack, Mladenov again called for justice:

 Jan 3

The attack on PM convoy on Christmas is a very worrying incident. It is absolutely unacceptable & the perpetrators must be brought to justice. Stones can kill— it was at the same spot where  lost her life in October. Such violence must stop

Whether the violence is initiated by Israelis or Palestinians, the only party for whom the UN seeks justice are Palestinian Arabs.

Some other examples:

 18 Dec 2018

I acknowledge efforts by to prevent settler-related violence. Further measures are needed to ensure that it fulfills its obligation to protect civilians and hold accountable those responsible for attacks.

The best Mladenov can muster when Jews are attacked is saying that there is no justification for the attack, a generic comment which is far from demanding that the Arab killers be punished.

 18 Dec 2018

I condemn the recent drive-by shooting near Ofra where 7 were injured and a pregnant woman whose baby was delivered prematurely and has tragically passed away. There is no justification for terror and I call on all to condemn it.

 14 Oct 2018

I condemn this Friday’s attack in the in which a woman was killed and her husband injured by stones allegedly thrown by assailants. Those responsible must be swiftly brought to justice. I urge all to stand up to violence and terror.

 17 Sep 2018

I extend my condolences to the family of , an Israeli-American civilian, who was stabbed in the yesterday. Everyone must stand up violence and condemn .

 27 Jul 2018

Shocked by the murder of an man yesterday by a teen in the . My thoughts and prayers go out to the bereved family. Such horrible acts serve only those who stand in the way of . Terror must be condemned by all.

There was only one time when Mladenov demanded that a Palestinian murderer be brought to justice, but even then he didn’t mention the killer’s background or ethnicity:

 10 Jan 2018

There is no justification for and those who condone it, praise it or glorify it. This is not the path to ! The perpetrators of yesterday’s attack must be brought to justice.

When the United Nations continually demands that Jewish terrorists be “brought to justice,” but does not similarly call upon Palestinian Arab terrorists to be punished for butchering Israelis, it reiterates its unceasing bias against Israel. Without a basic notion of justice for Israelis, the resolutions the UN passes against Israel are meaningless Palestinian propaganda posters without a shred of moral significance.

For many years, the UN has stood as a crude tool of despots and dictators, pretending to have an iota of credibility. But time and again the shroud of respectability falls revealing the UN’s pathetic utility as a blunt instrument in the Muslim and Arab war against the Jewish State.

Related First.One.Through articles:

The United Nations’ Adoption of Palestinians, Enables It to Only Find Fault With Israel

The United Nations Can Hear the Songs of Gazans, but Cannot See Their Rockets

The UN Does Not Want Palestinian Terrorists to be Held Accountable

The UN Can’t Support Israel’s Fight on Terrorism since it Considers Israel the Terrorists

The Only Religious Extremists for the United Nations are “Jewish Extremists”

What’s “Outrageous” for the United Nations

The United Nations Once Again “Encourages” Hamas

The Hollowness of the United Nations’ “All”

UN Comments on the Murder of Innocents: Itamar and Duma

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: FirstOne Through Israel Analysis and FirstOneThrough

 

Marking November 29 as The International Day of Solidarity with Jews Living East of the Green Line

Posted on by
6

For many years, the United Nations has chosen to mark the anniversary of the November 29, 1947 vote to partition Palestine into distinct Jewish and Arab states as a day of solidarity for only one of those groups – the Arabs.

The times they aren’t a changin’.

On November 28, 2018, the UN Secretary General Antonio Gutteres spoke at the Meeting of Committee of the Inalienable Rights of Palestinian People (that’s the actual name of the group). Not only does the UN only have a unique group for the Arabs from Palestine and none for the Jews, but the UN also argues that the Arabs have “inalienable rights” to a separate country – not autonomy or self-determination – but a special unique country, which is also a right not afforded to any people anywhere on the planet.

Speaking at such a forum the day before the November 29 anniversary, Gutteres gave the audience the red meat they so covet. After calling on Israel to stop building “illegal settlements,” he added the following:

“I call on all actors, and first and foremost the leadership of Israel and the Palestinian Authority, to take bold steps and restore faith in the promise of General Assembly resolution 181, of two States living side-by-side in peace and security, fulfilling the legitimate national aspirations of both peoples, with borders based on the 1967 lines and Jerusalem as the capital of both States ‑ East Jerusalem being the capital of the Palestinian State.

It is the only way to achieve the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people. It is the only option for a comprehensive and just peace, and I call on the international community to intensify its engagement and reiterate its commitment to assist Palestinians and Israelis in reaching the two-State solution.”

Moving past the absurdity that no people on the planet have inalienable rights to their own sovereign country, just to self-determination (hey, anyone want to start a country tomorrow?) it is further absurd to state that the only formula to achieve such right is based on armistice lines from a war fought over 70 years ago in which all parties agreed would NOT serve as permanent borders, and that dividing a capital city between two countries has any logic, when it is a formula only used in war-time (Berlin, Beirut, Nicosia anyone?)

But it moves past the absurd to discriminatory and antisemitic to declare that Jews should be banned from living anywhere east of that Green Line. That the only way that an Arab state could exist is to be Jew-free and controlling Judaism’s holiest location.

People who want to see peace in the region should stand firmly against this antisemitic formula for a two-state solution. A viable – and peaceful – independent Palestine could exist:

  • WITH Jews living throughout the land;
  • with borders that DO NOT follow the 1949 Armistice Lines / Green Line;
  • with BETHLEHEM, an integral part of the corpus separatum that was voted upon on November 29, 1947, as the Palestinian capital city

The world continues to declare that Palestinian Arabs have unique rights and Jews uniquely have none: Palestinian Arabs must have a distinct country; Jews must be banned from living in parts of their holy land.

It is past time to call out the insanity and antisemitism, and mark November 29 as a day of solidarity with Jews in Israel and its territories. It is time to recall:

  • that international laws of 1920 and 1922 specifically ENCOURAGED Jews to live throughout Palestine, including in Judea and Samaria which were later renamed the “West Bank”;
  • international laws and human rights laws that forbid the discrimination of anyone based on religion from being able to live in Palestine, including the West Bank and Gaza (Article 15)

These are not “right-wing” positions. These are positions based on human rights and international law.

View of Jerusalem, from Hebrew University
(photo: First.One.Through)

I stand with the rights of Jews to live throughout their holy land, including in their holiest city of Jerusalem.

Related First.One.Through articles:

Time to Dissolve Key Principles of the “Inalienable Rights of Palestinians”

The Palestinian State I Oppose

The UN’s #Alternative Facts about the 1967 Six Day War

Enduring Peace versus Peace Now

Ending Apartheid in Jerusalem

Related First.One.Through videos:

The 1967 “Borders” (music by The Kinks)

Judea and Samaria (music by Foo Fighters)

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: FirstOne Through Israel Analysis

The Hypocrisy Between An Embassy for Israel in Jerusalem and East Jerusalem, OPT

Posted on by
6

There are so many examples of the bias at the United Nations in favor of Palestinian Arabs over Israel, that the obvious ones are sometimes overlooked.

Consider the situation of Jerusalem, a holy city for three religions which has had a Jewish majority since the 1860’s.

In trying to find a solution for the hotly contested city, the UN General Assembly voted on November 29, 1947 to place Greater Jerusalem and Greater Bethlehem into a distinct corpus separatum which would neither be part of a Jewish State of Israel nor an Arab State of Palestine. The nations at the UN voted 33 in favor, 13 against and 10 abstentions. (The 13 countries that voted against the partition were mostly the Arab and Muslim countries of Afghanistan, Cuba, Egypt, Greece, India, Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Turkey, Yemen.) The proposal would never come to pass, as the “corpus separatum” was divided after Israel’s War of Independence with Israel controlling the western half of Jerusalem and the Jordanians controlling all of Greater Bethlehem and the eastern portion of Jerusalem.

Israel declared Jerusalem as its capital city and located its federal government buildings there, but virtually no countries recognized Israel’s assumption of the western part of the city, nor the Jordanian occupation of the eastern part of the city. That was the situation from 1949 to 1967, and continued to be true after the Jordanians attacked Israel again in June 1967 and lost its portion of corpus separatum and the rest of the West Bank.

For decades, countries have continued to withhold their recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, much as they had since Israel founding.


Israeli flag waving in front of the Western Wall of the Jewish Temple Mount
(photo: First.One.Through)

That changed recently.

In December 2017, the United States decided to acknowledge the fact that Israel’s capital is Jerusalem, to the chagrin of many other countries. A few weeks later, the UN voted to condemn the United States’ relocation of its Israeli embassy to Jerusalem by a vote of 128 to 9, with 35 abstentions. Many of the 128 countries voiced opinions that Jerusalem is a final status issue to be resolved between the Israelis and Palestinian Authority. Any recognition that either the Israelis or Palestinian Arabs has a superior claim to areas of corpus separatum was to be avoided.

Yet, with no sense of embarrassment or question of hypocrisy, many of those same nations which voted to admonish the US, chose to vote at the UN on November 16, 2018 on several resolutions which referred to East Jerusalem as “Occupied Palestinian Territory.”

  • Draft resolution “Applicability of the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, of 12 August 1949, to the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and the other occupied Arab territories” (document A/C.4/73/L.19) passed by a vote of 154 to 5 with 8 abstentions.
  • The draft resolution titled “Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and the occupied Syrian Golan” (document A/C.4/73/L.20) passed by a recorded 153 votes in favour to 5 against with 10 abstentions.
  • The draft resolution “Israeli practices affecting the human rights of the Palestinian people in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem” (document A/C.4/73/L.21) passed by 153 to 6 with 9 abstentions.

If countries want to be consistent in their treatment of Jerusalem and desire for peace, they have a choice: either recognize Israel’s claim to the western part of the city and move their embassies to the western part of Jerusalem just like the United States, OR refuse to call “East Jerusalem” part of “Occupied Palestinian Territory.”

Any country refusing to move its embassy for Israel to Jerusalem while simultaneously calling the eastern part of Jerusalem part of “Occupied Palestinian Territory” is spitting in the face of Israel and rejecting participating in the peace process.

Related First.One.Through articles:

Abbas’s Harmful East Jerusalem Fantasy

Western Jerusalem’s U.S. Consulate and Embassy

Ending Apartheid in Jerusalem

I call BS: You Never Recognized Jerusalem as Israel’s Capital

Both Israel and Jerusalem are Beyond Recognition for Muslim Nations

750 Years of Continuous Jewish Jerusalem

Arabs in Jerusalem

The Arguments over Jerusalem

The United Nations’ Adoption of Palestinians, Enables It to Only Find Fault With Israel

Maybe Truman Should Not Have Recognized Israel

The United Nations and Holy Sites in the Holy Land

The UN’s Disinterest in Jewish Rights at Jewish Holy Places

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: FirstOne Through Israel Analysis

 

While Palestinians Fire 400 Rockets, the United Nations Meets to Give Them Money

Posted on by
13

On November 12, 2018, the Palestinian Arabs in Gaza fired over 400 rockets into various populations centers in Israel. Buses, roads and homes were hit, killing and injuring people trying to manage their lives.


Rockets fired from Gaza into Israel

The United Nations was keenly aware of the situation in Gaza. It talks about the Palestinian Arabs living there every day.

And so it was on November 12. Dozens of delegates from around the world came to express their desire for more money to flow to these same Palestinians via UNRWA, the United Nations Relief and Works Agency, which has perpetuated the status of statelessness.

  • The delegate from Syria which hosts a few hundred thousand Palestinians said the “United Nations and the Secretary-General must bridge the Agency’s funding shortfall and work with UNRWA to sustain funding,” and nothing must “interfere with the right of Palestine refugees to return home [meaning to Israel].“
  • The delegate from Jordan which hosts – and granted citizenship – to over 2 million Palestinians said “many of those refugees are denied their right to prosper and to return to their villages [meaning to Israel],” and “undermining UNRWA could deepen the frustrations of refugees and cause young people to fall prey to extremism.” (it could get worse than rocket fire).
  • The delegate from Lebanon noted “his country hosts about 469,000 [Palestinians],” and was glad that “UNRWA has contributed to efforts aimed at keeping the right of return [meaning to Israel] on the table,” and “he welcomed the proposed initiatives to fund the Agency [UNRWA].”
  • The delegate from Norway focused immediately on Gaza, where the financial situation of UNRWA created a terrible “humanitarian situation” for Palestinian Arabs “emphasizing that its financial situation is very concerning.“
  • The delegate from Indonesia said that “Palestinians should not be deprived of the right of return [meaning to Israel], while highlighting Indonesia’s increased contribution to the Agency’s work.“

The list goes on, and includes delegates from Japan, Kuwait, Tunisia, Malaysia, Ecuador, China, Nigeria, Egypt, UAE, Sudan, Australia, Turkey, India, Brazil, Russia and the Vatican.

Pierre Krahenbuhl, Commissioner-General of UNRWA, thanked the Committee for their recognition and support, also noting the remarkable support mobilized in the face of the Agency’s dire financial shortfall.

  • No one addressed the rocket fire from Gaza.
  • No one mentioned that Hamas which runs Gaza threatened to continue to shell the Israeli cities of Ashdod and Beer Sheva.
  • No one discussed the Hamas Charter which calls for the destruction of Israel.
  • No one mentioned the three wars which Palestinians from Gaza have waged against Israel over the past decade.
  • No one mentioned the car rammings or knife attacks against Israeli civilians by Palestinian Arabs from the West Bank.

While Palestinians shelled Israel, the United Nations demanded more monies for Palestinians and a right to move into Israel. Such actions are worse than the “Zionism is racism” resolution of the 1970’s. The UN is actively aiding, abetting and encouraging war against a member state.

Related First.One.Through articles:

What’s Wrong with UNRWA

UNRWA Is Not Just Making “Refugees,” It’s Creating Palestinians

Shut UNRWA in Gaza Immediately

UNRWA’s Ongoing War against Israel and Jews

UNRWA’s Munchausen Disease

Help Refugees: Shut the UNRWA, Fund the UNHCR

The United Nations’ Remorse for “Creating” Israel

The United Nations’ Adoption of Palestinians, Enables It to Only Find Fault With Israel

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: FirstOne Through Israel Analysis

 

Compensation Fund for Palestinian Arabs’ and MENA Jews’ Lost Property

Posted on by
5

As the US hopefully initiates plans to dismantle the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestinians in the Near East (UNRWA), it is an appropriate time for Israel to assess the amount of money that Palestinians are due for their lost property.

ALL Palestinians

Part of the lure that the United Nations dangled before the Stateless Arabs from Palestine (SAPs) to register as refugees in the UN agency was that those people who remained in the immediate surrounding area (Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, West Bank and Gaza) would not only be entitled to free schooling and healthcare, subsidized housing and business loans, but would ALSO have the opportunity to either move into Israel or be compensated for the homes that were left by parents, grandparents and great-grandparents long ago. This contrasts with relatives who left the region to have careers, homes and citizenship outside of Israel’s neighbors who gave up the right to move to Israel and/or be compensated for the lost property according to the UN.

That’s absurd. Lost property is lost property.

It is time for Israel to take a full accounting of the property which Arabs left in 1948 when five Arab armies came to destroy the reestablished Jewish State of Israel. Those Arab descendants who lost property should not be limited to those who registered with UNRWA to be wards of the world. There are Arabs who live in Chile, the United Kingdom and elsewhere who should also be entitled to compensation for a lost home.

The compensation should be paid directly to the Arabs still alive from 1948. In cases in which there is no survivor, the compensation should be shared ratably among all of the descendants regardless of where they currently live and whether they are registered as “refugees” with the UN.

Such approach is consistent with the founding resolution of UNRWA and UNGA Resolution 194 which states:

 “that the refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbours should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date, and that compensation should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return and for loss of or damage to property which, under principles of international law or in equity, should be made good by the Governments or authorities responsible;”

For 70 years it has been clear through wars, intifadas, car ramming and stabbing attacks and a leadership that continues to refuse to acknowledge the “Jewishness of Israel” and has laws for the death penalty for any Arab that sells land to a Jew, that the Palestinian Arabs are unwilling to “live at peace.” The chapter of “Right of Return” has closed. It is time to settle the issue completely with compensation.

Does that mean that third generation Palestinian Arabs living in Chile will have the same rights to compensation as the SAPs in Gaza? Absolutely. Why should they be treated differently? Just because Gazans have been living off of the world’s charity for 70 years, does not make them more entitled to compensation for lost property than Palestinians that established productive lives in new countries. A Palestinian-Canadian, Palestinian-Chilean and Gazan will all have to share from the same compensation fund.

850,000 Jews from Arab Lands

It is similarly time for the Arab countries that forced their native Jews to flee from their homes to pay compensation to them for lost property. These Jews were routed from their houses out of pure antisemitism, unlike the Arabs from Palestine that had launched a civil war over land. Each country should follow a similar program of compensating the direct party that was forced to leave their home, or their direct descendants.

  • Algeria 140,000 Jews
  • Egypt 75,000
  • Iraq 135,000
  • Lebanon 5,000
  • Libya 38,000
  • Morocco 265,000
  • Syria 30,000
  • Tunisia 105,000
  • Yemen 55,000

This total of 850,000 Jews does not include the Jews who fled Iran and Afghanistan.

The fact that the Jewish survivors of the Arab expulsion and their descendants now have citizenship in Israel, France, Canada and elsewhere make them no less entitled to compensation for lost property, just like the Palestinians with citizenship in various countries.

For 70 years the Jews and Arabs from around the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) have fought each other and routed people from their homes. It is time for just compensation to be made for all parties to forge a pathway to an enduring peace in the region.

Related First.One.Through articles:

Shut UNRWA in Gaza Immediately

UNRWA’s Ongoing War against Israel and Jews

Help Refugees: Shut the UNRWA, Fund the UNHCR

What’s Wrong with UNRWA

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: FirstOne Through  Israel Analysis