1 Response to Professor Guy Vago vindt iets uit !

1. mosckerr schreef:

   17 oktober 2025 om 2:31 pm

   Blood Libels defines the Yatzir Ha’Raw spirits within the hearts of all Goyim throughout the generations. Post the Oct 7th Abomination massacre by Hamas, almost immediately came the blood libel slander of “Genocide”. But post the ’67 War the blood libel revisionist history introduced by both Britain and France: the 242 declaration that peace only achievable in the Middle East through a UN “internatioanal law” dictate upon Israel!

   The semantic shift in the phrase “territoires occupés” between 1964 and post-1967 UN usage exposes the deliberate retroactive redefinition that Arab and European diplomats engineered after the Six-Day War. The Palestine National Covenant (1964)—ratified three years before 242—defines “Palestine” as the “occupied” land within the British Mandate borders, excluding the West Bank (then under Jordanian sovereignty) and Gaza (under Egyptian control).

   Weigh now the hostile blood libel language of “the” French UN 242 post war revisionist history. The French official text uses “des territoires occupés” — which in French usage is normally read as “from “the” occupied territories” (i.e., with “the” definite sense). That phrasing more naturally supports the French holier than thou, reading that Israel should withdraw from the territories (the entirety of those occupied in 1948! The French wording and the preamble’s “inadmissibility of acquisition of territory by war” buttress an interpretation that envisages full withdrawal, which includes even West Jerusalem! Recall the Vatican demanded in 1947 the Jerusalem exist as an Internationally ruled City, similar to Post WWII Berlin. Many continental and Arab states, and many subsequent UN framings, preferred this reading.

   The French text gave political cover to states and blocs pressing for “the” full Israeli withdrawal from “48 occupied territories”; the English text gave the drafters (Caradon, Goldberg et al.) a way to frame 242 as a negotiating framework rather than an immediate, absolute mandate for total withdrawal from ’67 “recaptured territories”. A fundamental presumption by both London and Paris. Both versions fundamentally err. Israel simply not a UN protectorate territory wherein the UN determines its borders like as attempted by the Peel Commission. Britain and France, nor any other UN Security Council States, determine the international borders of Israel. And how much more so the Capital City of Israel. Yet these hostile states promote revisionist history and refuse to recognize Jerusalem as the Capital of Israel! Both versions of UN 242 an utter fraud.

   Hence the distinction between the British and French versions of 242 represents a Good Cop vs. Bad Cop propaganda rhetoric to justify the dismantling of Zionism’s pre WWI platform that Jews have equal rights to achieve self-determination in the Middle East. All Arab Israeli Wars ever fought, including the Oct 7th Abomination War reflects the Blood Libel Racism spirits which breaths within the Yatzir Ha’Raw hearts of all Goyim – both Arab/Muslims and European/Russians.

   LikeGeliked door 1 persoon

   Beantwoorden

Deze site gebruikt Akismet om spam te bestrijden. Ontdek hoe de data van je reactie verwerkt wordt.