web analytics

Netanyahu… are you kidding me?

In full, utter and complete breach of international law (in the form of ICJ rulings, multiple Security Council resolutions and agreements the zionist entity itself made), the Israeli government has approved the building of another major settlement on undisputed Palestinian land.

According to the article linked to above, the Israeli Ambassador to the United States has said that the two countries’ relationship is at its lowest in 35 years. As if that’s what the whole issue is about… like that’s what really matters.

Israeli PM Netanyahu has also apparently said that

“Building these Jewish neighbourhoods in Jerusalem does not hurt the Arabs of East Jerusalem or come at their expense.”

But it’s in breach of International Law and you know it. You also know that it’s not your place to interpret the law and since the rightful owners of the land have not given you permission to use the land, the occupying idiots that you are have no right to do anything what-so-ever. Obviously, and as has been the case since Palestine was internationally recognized as the British Mandate of Palestine, since no one seems to enforce the law, you (the government of Israel) will continue to do as you please.

[This post includes no new addition to the discourse on the Israeli occupation of Palestine. I am just sharing the news]

2 Comments

  1. Demha says:

    The israeli-palestinian conflict is a great example of an immemorial tradition of land conflict (the darkly comic thing here is the land isnt actually worth anything). Land, resources don’t actually BELONG to anyone – no individual or tribe . Land is just there. Instead of figuring out how to make the land fertile (fertile in the broader sense of the word) for everyone (which is particularly possible in this particular part of the levant) we fight over it. International law can’t have any ‘fair’ say over it; in fact, international law is in many respects an instrument for some to take what doesn’t belong to anyone.

  2. Faisal says:

    I wont argue against what you’re saying, but, armed with your ideas on the issue and in the current context, what solution would you offer?

Leave a Reply

*