UK og to-stats-løsningen

Her er en usædvanlig artikel : en der kritiserer to-stats”løsningen” som alle uvidende europæsiske politikere og pseudojorunalister elsker !

“England’s outrageous outrage

What is chutzpah? A Jew pouring a foundation in his ancestral homeland who gets a summons, a sanctions package, a joint communiqué with six other governments and a threat to label his tomatoes.”

af Daniel Winston: “In 1920 and 1921, a year after international law formally designated the Land of Israel as the national home of the Jewish people, your predecessor Winston Churchill took a pen and handed 78 percent of it to the Arabs to create the Emirate of Transjordan. He did not ask us. He did not consult us. He simply amputated the overwhelming majority of the Jewish national home and gifted it to a non-native Hashemite family from the Hejaz as a consolation prize. The two-state solution, if anyone in Whitehall is counting, was implemented over a century ago. It is called Jordan.”

Her er først nogle kort over området, som viser hvordan UK (Churchill !) først gav Golan til Syrien, fordi den franske mandatmagt bed om det , dernæst hvordan UK (Churchill !) forærede 78% af arealet til en prins fra Saudiarabien og kaldte de TransJordan …

Og her det stærkt amputerede område, som FN i 1947 foreslog at dele mellem jøder og arabere

Den engelske peel-kommision i 1937 foreslået denne deling . Jøderne sagde ja til princippet om deleing ( men nej til det konkrete forslag af grænser), araberne sagde som sædvanlig nej

FN foreslog – og vedtog) i 1947 at dele området næsten 50%-50% mellem jøder og arabere

Jøderne sagde ja, araberne som sædvanlig nej og og begyndte en krig, der endte med jødisk sejr over 5 arabiske stater :

Det hører du jo ALDRIG noget om i DR-fake-news/TV2-fake-news

Og til sammenligning:

Taget herfra

“Britain will not stand back and accept the destruction of the two-state solution,” the British Foreign Secretary declared this week, after summoning Israel’s Chargé d’Affaires like a headmaster calling in a boy caught smoking behind the bicycle shed.

The offense? A tender for apartments in E1, between Jerusalem and Ma’ale Adumim, in the Jewish homeland, approved in 2025, processed for months, and now suddenly the gravest threat to world peace since the fall of Singapore.

Related articles:

• This is exactly the situation you kill your way out of
• Mamdani’s brave and viral posturing at the end of a rope
• Bennett’s dangerous delusions
• Show your papers! The arugula is subsidized

Fine. Don’t stand back. Sit down. Lie down. Have a smoke behind the bicycle shed. Do whatever it is you do these days instead of governing His Majesty’s Global Colonial Empire. Just spare us the sermon.

Because here is what has changed, and what London has not yet noticed: Jews are finished dying so that nations with unimaginable quantities of Jewish blood on their hands can feel comfortable with themselves. We are finished being the raw material for other people’s moral self-portraits. And we are finished pretending that a fictitious nation with no coinage, no kings, no language, no archaeology, no literature and no recorded existence as a distinct people prior to roughly 1964 has a superior claim to the hills of Judea than the people whose entire civilizational library was written there.

Let us review the résumé of one of many instructors in international morality.

In 1920 and 1921, a year after international law formally designated the Land of Israel as the national home of the Jewish people, your predecessor Winston Churchill took a pen and handed 78 percent of it to the Arabs to create the Emirate of Transjordan. He did not ask us. He did not consult us. He simply amputated the overwhelming majority of the Jewish national home and gifted it to a non-native Hashemite family from the Hejaz as a consolation prize. The two-state solution, if anyone in Whitehall is counting, was implemented over a century ago. It is called Jordan. It sits there to this day, seventy-eight percent of the promise, and nobody in London has ever once described it as an obstacle to peace.

In 1939, with the crematoria being designed, your government issued the White Paper, sealing the gates of the Land of Israel and turning Jews fleeing Nazism back toward Europe. Back toward the trains. Back toward the gas. That is not a rhetorical flourish. That is a policy with a body count, and it is yours.

And after the Shoah, when the survivors crawled out of the ash and made for the one shore on earth that wanted them, it was the Royal Navy that intercepted them. It was British soldiers who dragged them off the decks. It was your right proper British administrators who deposited them behind barbed wire in Cyprus and Atlit, or shipped them back to displaced persons camps in Germany, of all places on God’s earth, or sent them to drown in the Struma. Countless Jews who had the temerity to survive Auschwitz were interned by His Majesty’s Government within sight of Haifa.

Are you not ashamed? Is there any residue of embarrassment left in that building on King Charles Street? From where, precisely, do you summon the insolence to instruct Jews, again, on how we may govern our affairs in the remaining sliver of what you yourselves once designated the national home of the Jewish people?

Now consider the geography of your supercilious outrage.

There is a country which, since 1967, has illegally occupied another land, deported the entire native population in an act of ethnic cleansing carried out with almost no international protest, and has continued that occupation in open defiance of General Assembly resolutions and an advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice. The occupied territory is the Chagos Archipelago. The occupying power is His Britannic Majesty’s United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. The Chagossians were removed so that a superpower could have an airbase, and their dogs were gassed to encourage them to leave quietly.

That is a real ethnic cleansing, with real victims, still alive, still litigating. It generated a fraction of the diplomatic energy that seven housing compounds in E1 produced in a single afternoon.

While we are consulting the atlas: Northern Ireland. Gibraltar. The Falklands, which half the world calls the Malvinas. The Sovereign Base Areas on Cyprus. Britain still administers colonial holdings thousands of miles from Dover, acquired by conquest, retained by force, and defended with the phrase “the wishes of the inhabitants” – a principle that evaporates instantly when the inhabitants happen to be Jews in Samaria.

Meanwhile, Jews are assaulted in Manchester, synagogues require armed guards in Paris, and Jewish schoolchildren in London wear their kippot under baseball caps. That produces a statement of concern. A Jew pouring a foundation in his ancestral homeland produces a summons, a sanctions package, a joint communiqué with six other governments and a threat to label his tomatoes.

And what is the legal theory underneath all this thunder? The phrase “flagrant breach of international law,” instinctively repeated with the glassy confidence of men who have never read a line of the law they are invoking.

• Not the San Remo Resolution.
• Not the Mandate for Palestine, whose Article 6 explicitly provides for close Jewish settlement on the land.
• Not Article 80 of the United Nations Charter, which preserved those rights.
• Not uti possidetis juris, the doctrine that fixes the borders of a new state at the administrative boundaries of the territory from which it emerged, and which every other decolonized state on earth relies upon without controversy.
• Not the elementary principle that territory taken in a defensive war against an enemy that launched a war of annihilation and lost is not the aggressor’s to reclaim by press release.

Read Professor Eugene Kontorovich on the subject, if you have the nerve. Then come back and tell us again about international law.

Which brings me to Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar’s reply, which was excellent, and which I would nonetheless amend in one particular. Sa’ar said the Jewish people have the right to live throughout the Land of Israel “just as the British have the right to live in London and throughout the United Kingdom.”

With respect, no. Our right is greater than theirs. The British acquired Britain the way they acquired everything else, by conquest, only earlier, and with fewer witnesses. We were given this land by its Creator, and for those who find that argument insufficiently secular, our claim is anchored in a documentary record longer, deeper and more legally continuous than that of the overwhelming majority of states currently sitting in the General Assembly. Balfour. San Remo. The League of Nations. The United Nations Charter. Three thousand years of literature, liturgy, coinage, pottery and graves. Show me the Palestinian equivalent. Take your time.

As for the two-state solution itself, the polite fiction requires a plain answer. Britain did not lose much sleep over the destruction of the two-state solution during the Second Intifada, when the buses were exploding in Jerusalem. It did not detect a threat to Palestinian statehood in the rocket arsenals of Gaza after Israel withdrew every civilian, every soldier, and even dug up every grave. It did not perceive an obstacle to peace on Oct. 7, 2023, when a Palestinian Arab polity that had governed itself for eighteen years used its sovereignty to livestream the largest massacre of Jews since the Holocaust. The two-state solution has been assassinated repeatedly, in daylight, by its intended beneficiaries, and the Foreign Office has never once filed a complaint.

It only becomes uniquely and glandularly urgent when Jews build homes.

So permit me to be blunt about what a two-state solution now means in practice. Not a solution. A delusion, and a lethal one – a sovereign Palestinian state on the ridgeline above Ben-Gurion Airport, above Kfar Saba, above the Knesset, guaranteed by the same governments that guaranteed everything else. And when it fails, as it will fail, the consequences will not be borne in Whitehall. No British minister will be dragged from his bed. No French family will be burned in its safe room. The prescriptions are written in London, Paris and Ottawa. The bill, as always, comes due in Israel.

Go ahead and sanction us, then. Label the wine. Cancel the physicists. Boycott the hitech and medtech which is in every corner of your economy and in every hospital. Blacklist another organization whose atrocity is filing a brief with the Israeli Supreme Court. You will not frighten a people who buried their children in November 2023 into trusting the judgment of those who were wrong about every single thing that led there.

I closed a recent column in Jerusalem News Syndicate, “Go ahead, England: Make my day,” with a loose paraphrase of Clint Eastwood, and after this week I see no reason to improve on it:

“I know what you’re thinking. Was that the fifth sanction or the sixth? In all the excitement, I’ve honestly lost count. But being as I’m standing on the most historically just patch of ground in the world – the one homeland my people were promised, exiled from and came home to. And seeing as how the Creator Himself promised to curse those who curse us – and being as the plain truth about Oct. 7 will blow every excuse you’ve got clean off – you’ve got to ask yourself one question, England: Do you feel lucky? Well, do you, punks?!”

So go ahead. Make my day.

Taget herfra