PALESTINA: Wie is hier de idioot?

Illustration shows Palestine and Israel flags on barbed wire.


 
Een nieuwe vorm van rassenhygiëne is gevraagd baserend op een te ontwerpen definitie van wat een volk is. Alvast kan deze voortbouwen op wat de Duitsers ooit ontwierpen als hun Nürnberger rassenleer. Want zeg nou zelf, wie is jood? Of Nederlander? Ach wacht, dat is geen ras. Jood overigens ook niet.
 
Wie zijn tuk op grenzen? In ieder geval diegenen die ergens een vlag planten als er geen mensen zijn die het betreffende gebied claimen en zich tegen indringers verzetten. In dat geval geldt het recht van de sterkste. De geschiedenis van het westers kolonialisme staat bol van de daaruit volgende conflicten. Ook van genocides. Er werd niet over gesproken, het betrof steeds zogeheten minderwaardige rassen.
 
Waren de nazi’s hun tijd vooruit? Gelet op wat in Palestina plaatsvindt mag je aannemen van wel. Israël toont het ons in de 21ste eeuw in alle openbaarheid. De zionisten geven de marsroute onverbloemd aan. We weten het dus, maar vooralsnog leggen we ze geen strobreed in de weg en ondersteunen we, het geciviliseerde, christelijke Westen, ze waar het maar kan. Zo denkt men af te komen van alle schuld joden eeuwenlang aangedaan.
 
Het recht, de mensenrechten, staat aan onze kant, daarvoor hebben we tijdig gezorgd. Die zijn vastgelegd nadat de USA als enige staat beschikte over atoombommen, onaantastbaar werd en zich alles dacht te kunnen permitteren wat God verboden had. De eerste leider van Israël begreep dat volkomen en zorgde er subiet voor dat zionisten ook over dergelijke wapens konden beschikken.
 


 
 

Zachary Foster

 
Breaking: the President of the International Court of Justice (@CIJ_ICJ), Julia Sebutinde, plagiarized sections of her dissenting opinion (Dissenting opinion of Vice-President Sebutinde) in which she voted against all provisional measures of South African’s case of Israel’s genocide of Palestinians.

On p. 6, Sebutinde writes: “”The name “Palestine” applied vaguely to a region that for the 400 years before World War I was part of the Ottoman Empire.”

This sentence was plagiarized word for word from a 2021 article published by Douglas J. Feith by the @HudsonInstitute titled, “The Forgotten History of the Term “Palestine,” in which he writes:

““Palestine” applied vaguely to a region that for the 400 years before World War I was part of the Ottoman empire.”

It gets worse. Sebutinde plagiarized the next two sentences as well. She writes:

“In 135 CE, after stamping out the second Jewish insurrection of the province of Judea or Judah, the Romans renamed that province “Syria Palaestina” (or “Palestinian Syria”). The Romans did this as a punishment, to spite the “Y’hudim” (Jewish population) and to obliterate the link between them and their province (known in Hebrew as Y’hudah). The name “Palaestina” was used in relation to the people known as the Philistines and found along the Mediterranean coast.”

These 2 sentences were also plagiarized from the same Feith piece, in which he writes:

“In 135 CE, after stamping out the province of Judea’s second insurrection, the Romans renamed the province Syria Palaestina—that is, “Palestinian Syria.” They did so resentfully, as a punishment, to obliterate the link between the Jews (in Hebrew, Y’hudim and in Latin Judaei) and the province (the Hebrew name of which was Y’hudah). “Palaestina” referred to the Philistines, whose home base had been on the Mediterranean coast.”

Sebutinde make a pitiful attempt to change a word here or there, but this is a textbook case of plagiarism. Feith’s piece is not cited in her legal opinion, even though she copied and pasted multiple sentences from the piece.

What a joke of judge. She’s making a mockery of the ICJ and should be removed immediately.


It gets worse. She also plagiarized at least 4 sentences from The Jewish Virtual Library (Myths & Facts – Israel’s Roots).

Here are the 4 sentences from Sebutinde, and then the 4 sentences from the Jewish Virtual Library immediately following:

1. Sebutinde: “Prior to the establishment of “British Mandatory Palestine”, Palestinian Arabs viewed themselves as having a unified identity with the Arabs in the subregion until the twentieth century.
1. Jewish Virtual Library: “Prior to partition, Palestinian Arabs did not view themselves as having a separate identity.”

2. Sebutinde: “When the distinguished Arab American historian, Professor Philip Hitti, testified against the Partition of Mandatory Palestine before the Anglo-American Committee in 1946, he remarked: “There is no such thing as ‘Palestine’ in history; absolutely not.””
2. Jewish Virtual Library: “When the distinguished Arab-American historian, Princeton University Prof. Philip Hitti, testified against partition before the Anglo-American Committee in 1946, he said: “There is no such thing as ‘Palestine’ in history, absolutely not.”

3. Sebutinde: “In 1937, a local Arab leader, Auni Bey Abdul-Hadi, told the Peel Commission, which ultimately suggested the partition of Palestine: “There is no such country [as Palestine]! ‘Palestine’ is a term the Zionists invented! There is no Palestine in the Bible. Our country was for centuries part of Syria.”
3. Jewish Virtual Library: “In 1937, a local Arab leader, Auni Bey Abdul-Hadi, told the Peel Commission, which ultimately suggested the partition of Palestine: “There is no such country [as Palestine]! ‘Palestine’ is a term the Zionists invented! There is no Palestine in the Bible. Our country was for centuries part of Syria.””

4. Sebutinde: “The first Palestine-Arab Congress which convened in Jerusalem from 27 January to 10 February 1919 to choose Palestinian representatives for the Paris Peace Conference, adopted a resolution in which it, inter alia, considered Palestine as an integral part of Arab Syria.”
4. Jewish Virtual Library: “When the First Congress of Muslim-Christian Associations met in Jerusalem in February 1919 to choose Palestinian representatives for the Paris Peace Conference, the following resolution was adopted: We consider Palestine as part of Arab Syria, as it has never been separated from it at any time.

Needless to say, Sebutinde is a pathetic excuse for a judge. If you are going to plagiarize, at least do so from a reputable source. At least, that way, you may be a dishonest person, but at least you’d get the facts right? The insanity of plagiarizing from the Jewish Virtual Library here is that she is both dishonestly representing other people’s work as her own, while also spreading misinformation.

How the heck this person is the world’s top judge is truly mind-blowing.


Correction: In the first tweet in this thread, I should have noted, the dissenting opinion (w/the plagiarism) was with regard to the “Legal Consequences arising from the Policies and Practices of Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem.” I incorrectly implied it was on the genocide opinion. My apologies.
 


BRON
X – @_ZachFoster – 26 jan. 2025



 

Uitgelicht: Getty Images – bron

Geef een reactie

Deze site gebruikt Akismet om spam te verminderen. Bekijk hoe je reactie gegevens worden verwerkt.