UPDATE ON UN MAP WITHOUT THE STATE OF ISRAEL: THE DECEPTION GROWS |
![]()
Previous Stories
![]()
|
|
![]() |
 |
 |
Deciphering the Arabic on the UN map with no Israel
|
Although the UN map without the state of Israel was on public display on November 29, 2005 at UN Headquarters, a photograph of it had to be taken surreptitiously since the only cameras permitted were those belonging to UN members and observers and the UN official photographer. The words on the map are therefore not easily legible. The United Nations, which houses the map in its Division for Palestinian Rights, has not made the map available for confirmation of its Arabic text. However, some of the words have now been deciphered and to the best of our knowledge include the following: "Palestine's Political Map, The Palestine Liberation Organization, the Center for Research, Beirut".
Recall that the January 16, 2006 letter from Under-Secretary-General Ibrahim Gambari to American Ambassador John Bolton claims "It is a historical map, showing Palestine as it was in 1948, at the end of the British mandate." Gambari stressed the map was just "Palestine as it existed in 1948."
But it turns out that the map was not historical at all. It was "Palestine's Political Map." And it wasn't a mere early map the UN found in a history book. It was a map which must have been produced post-1964, since the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) was created June 2, 1964.
|
|
![]() |
THE MAP'S AUTHORS:
THE EMBLEM OF THE PLO -- THE UN MAP WITH NO ISRAEL
![]()
|
|
|
|
Deciphering the Arabic on the UN map with no Israel |
Although the UN map without the state of Israel was on public display on November 29, 2005 at UN Headquarters, a photograph of it had to be taken surreptitiously since the only cameras permitted were those belonging to UN members and observers and the UN official photographer. The words on the map are therefore not easily legible. The United Nations, which houses the map in its Division for Palestinian Rights, has not made the map available for confirmation of its Arabic text. However, some of the words have now been deciphered and to the best of our knowledge read as follows: Palestine's Political Map, The Palestine Liberation Organization, the Center for Research, Beirut.
Recall that the January 16, 2006 letter from Under-Secretary-General Ibrahim Gambari to American Ambassador John Bolton claims "It is a historical map, showing Palestine as it was in 1948, at the end of the British mandate." Gambari stressed the map was just "Palestine as it existed in 1948."
But it turns out that the map was not historical at all. It was "Palestine's Political Map." And it wasn't a mere early map the UN found in a history book. It was a map which must have been produced post-1964, since the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) was created June 2, 1964.
In fact, when the UN Committee on the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People decided to display this map starting in November of 1981, armed forces of the PLO occupied large areas of southern Lebanon, frequently firing rockets into northern Israel. For the PLO, Lebanon was then home turf. They had been allowed to set up shop following an agreement reached in Cairo in November 1969, after being ousted from their former headquarters in Jordan. In addition to using Lebanon to mount armed attacks on Israel, they were also mounting a political campaign to redraw the map of the Middle East. The political platform of the PLO in 1981 was unambiguous. It had an emblem with a depiction of their claimed territory of "Palestine" in exactly the same form as the UN map – without an Israel. And they had a Charter which said "Palestine, with the boundaries it had during the British Mandate, is an indivisible territorial unit...The liberation of Palestine...is a national duty and...aims at the liquidation of the Zionist presence in Palestine...The partition of Palestine in 1947 and the establishment of the state of Israel are entirely illegal, regardless of the passage of time..."
|
|
UN publication currently on UN website attacks legitimacy of Israel |
But that isn't the only misleading statement in the UN's response to Ambassador Bolton. In the January 16, 2006 UN letter Gambari states that the only thing worrying Secretary-General Kofi Annan about the map was that "the map has acquired a very new and troubling connotation in light of the remarks made recently by the President of the Islamic Republic of Iran."
But lo and behold, far from a new phenomenon, it turns out that the UN-sponsored message of wiping Israel off the map, is still on its web pages. A UN publication, entitled "The Origins and Evolution of the Palestine Problem: 1917-1988," and produced by the UN Division for Palestinian Rights (1990), rewrites history from the early nineteenth century on.
The UN website is used by students, teachers, laypersons and legislators across the globe.
Here are selections:
*****
The Origins and Evolution
of the Palestine Problem:
1917-1988
...the British Government had not possessed the right "to dispose of Palestine"...[T]he commitments to the Arabs not only had been infringed by the Sykes-Picot agreement but, ...disregard[ed]... the inherent rights and the wishes of the Palestinian people...[T]the British Government had given Zionist leaders separate assurances regarding the establishment of a "national home for the Jewish people in Palestine", an undertaking that sowed the seeds of prolonged conflict in Palestine....[T]he Balfour Declaration...ultimately led to partition and to the problem as it exists today. Any understanding of the Palestine issue, therefore, requires some examination of this Declaration which can be considered the root of the problem of Palestine.
...
The historical background of the "Jewish national home" concept
...the goal of zionism from the start was the establishment of a Jewish State in Palestine. The rights of the people of Palestine themselves received no attention in these plans.
...The Balfour Declaration became a highly controversial document. It disturbed those Jewish circles who were not in favour of the Zionist aim of the creation of a Jewish State...Many Jewish communities of non-Zionist convictions regarded themselves as nationals of their countries, and the concept of a "Jewish national home" created strong conflicts of loyalties...Foremost among Jewish critics was Sir Edwin Montagu, Secretary of State for India and the only Jewish member of the British Cabinet....He questioned the credentials of the Zionist Organization to speak for all Jews.
...Three features of the Balfour Declaration draw attention. One is that evidently it was not in accordance with the spirit of the pledges of independence given to the Arabs both before and after it was issued.
...
Allied policy on Palestine
...The decision of the Allied Powers to support Zionist aims drew protest from Palestinians. Citizens of Nazareth reminded the British Administrator in Jerusalem: "In view of the declaration of the decision of the Peace Conference regarding the establishment of a Jewish national home in Palestine, we hereby beg to declare that we are the owners of this country and the land is our national home ..."
...
The drafting of the Palestine Mandate
... [Lord] Curzon [British Foreign Secretary] commented: "...I don't want a Hebrew State."
...When the question of the British Mandate over Palestine was discussed in Parliament, it became clear that opinion in the House of Lords was strongly opposed to the Balfour policy...The House of Lords voted to repeal the Balfour Declaration, but a similar motion was defeated in the House of Commons and the British Government formally accepted the Mandate.
...
The question of the validity of the Mandate
It is clear that by failing to consult the Palestinian people in the decision on the future of their country, the victorious Powers ignored not only the principle of self-determination that they themselves had endorsed, but also the provisions of Article 22 of the League's Covenant....A strict policy of what in today's terms would be described as racial discrimination was maintained by the Zionist Organization in this rapid advance towards the "national home". ... The drive of political zionism to establish a settler State in Palestine was met by violent resistance from the Palestinians, and this situation simmered until it boiled over in 1936.
...
The Peel [Royal] Commission Report
"... When at last they came before us, headed by the Mufti of Jerusalem...he summed up the Arab demands as... 'the abandonment of the experiment of the Jewish national home' ... Palestine Arab nationalism is inextricably interwoven with antagonism to the Jews....[A]s the [national] home has grown, the fear has grown with it that, if and when self-government is conceded, it may not be national in the Arab sense, but government by a Jewish majority. That is why it is difficult to be an Arab patriot and not to hate the Jews...."
Partition was unacceptable to the Palestinians, whose struggle for self-determination had brought the British Government to admit the unworkability of the Mandate. The rebellion flared up again, lasting until 1939. The Arab Higher Committee formally reasserted the right of Palestinians to full independence in the whole of Palestine, and the replacement of the Mandate by a treaty between Great Britain and an independent Palestine.
...
Palestine in 1939
... The Palestinians had sensed that only through violence could they force recognition of their inherent rights. ...
The Jewish response
...
The Palestinian rebellion, the Royal Commission's report and the 1939 White Paper's policies constituted a series of reversals to the aim of political Zionism to establish a settler state in Palestine.
...
The London Conference
...The new London Conference met from September 1946 to February 1947...The Arab countries attending...presented to the British Government their own proposals, with the following principal features: (a) Palestine would be a unitary State with a permanent Arab majority... Faced with this situation, Great Britain decided to relinquish its mandatory role and to hand over the Palestine problem, created over three decades by the Balfour Declaration and the Palestine Mandate, to the United Nations. On 18 February 1947, the Foreign Secretary stated in the House of Commons:
"His Majesty's Government have ... been faced with an irreconcilable conflict of principles...For the Jews, the essential point of principle is the creation of a sovereign Jewish State. For the Arabs, the essential point of principle is to resist to the last the establishment of Jewish sovereignty in any part of Palestine.
...
The transformation of Mandated Palestine
... Ironically, the Palestinian Arabs were to suffer an experience similar to the Jews - a diaspora.
...
Arnold J. Toynbee...wrote in 1968:
"... The reason why the State of Israel exists today and why today 1,500,000 Palestinian Arabs are refugees is that, for 30 years, Jewish immigration was imposed on the Palestinian Arabs by British military power until the immigrants were sufficiently numerous and sufficiently well-armed to be able to fend for themselves with tanks and planes of their own. The tragedy in Palestine is not just a local one; it is a tragedy for the world, because it is an injustice that is a menace to the world's peace."
*****
This lengthy UN pseudo-history lesson ends with the anti-semitic historiography of Toynbee.
|
|
NGO aiming to end Jewish state receives UN accreditation January 24, 2006 |
The UN cover-up goes even farther. Delegitimizing Israel is not only an Iranian problem, or an old map or publication problem. January 24, 2006 the UN Committee on NGOs granted UN accreditation to the NGO BADIL, the Resource Center for Palestinian Residency and Refugee Rights. Accreditation gives NGOs the ability to attend UN meetings, and in some contexts, such as the UN Commission on Human Rights, an entitlement to speak.
The accreditation Committee is composed of 19 UN member states from the five different geographic regions. The current members are: Cameroon, Chile, China, Colombia {Chair}, Cote d'Ivoire, Cuba, France, Germany, India, Iran, Pakistan (Vice-Chair), Peru, Romania (Vice-Chair), Russia, Senegal, Sudan (Vice-Chair), Turkey (Vice-Chair), United States, Zimbabwe.
Yes, such human rights luminaries as China, Cuba, Iran, Sudan and Zimbabwe – with Sudan as a Vice-Chair – are deciding which NGOs are entitled to special UN access and participatory rights in UN meetings.
In theory, every NGO which is accredited must satisfy the criteria that "the aims and purposes of the organization shall be in conformity with the spirit, purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations."
Which brings us to BADIL. It was established in 1998. It is engaged in activities that directly contradict the spirit, purposes and principles of the UN Charter. But the UN Committee on NGOs granted UN accreditation to the organization regardless. The delegations of the U.S., Germany and France, merely put on record that they disassociated themselves with the decision - an absolutely meaningless statement which does nothing to prevent BADIL from adding its voice to UN-based opposition to the Jewish state.
There was no doubt about the nature of BADIL, and hence its expected contribution to the future of UN activities. See for example:
(1) ADVOCATING THE END OF A JEWISH STATE
Excerpt from BADIL working paper entitled "The Evolution of an Independent, Community-Based Campaign for Palestinian Refugee Rights-Palestinian Refugees in the 1967 Occupied Territories and 1948 Palestine/Israel Coping with the Post-Oslo Conditions" prepared for the TARI conference "The Right of Return: Palestinian Refugees and Prospects for a Durable Peace" held on the 8th April, 2000:
"...BADIL proposes an initiative...This international campaign initiative aims to...Raise international public awareness for Palestinian refugees' right of return, restitution of property, and compensation. The public awareness campaign should be designed in the context of the anti-racism campaign and highlight the fact that racism, discrimination, and ethnic cleansing policies inherent in the Zionist model of the exclusive Jewish state represent both the cause of the massive Palestinian displacement in 1947-8 and the major obstacle to their repatriation in the framework of a just and durable solution in the future."
Excerpt from speech given by Allegra Pacheco, at Washington DC Right of Return Rally, printed in "al-Majdal", a quarterly magazine of the BADIL Resource Center, September 2000:
"...I am here to say that there is a solution to the refugee issue-And it isn't Oslo...And it isn't return to today's ghetto of Gaza or a West Bank bantustan. The solution is Awda, complete and unrestricted return to Palestine, all of it from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea. When I say this, my Israeli Jewish colleagues respond, "But if they all return, We will loose our Jewish majority and our Jewish character of state." And others say to me, "If they come back to here, where will I live?" And I respond quite simply, I say, that the answer is democracy and equality. Today, ethnically-based or race-based states are a thing of the past. From Bosnia, to South Africa, and even our Jim Crow Southern states we have all seen how these types of regimes foster divisions, hatred, violence and endless suffering for men, women and children. And you and I have seen such suffering in Israel/Palestine because of these state-sponsored divisions. It is time to put an end to this...Today in Israel/Palestine, we are not facing peace but apartheid."
Excerpt from "BADIL Occasional Bulletin no. 05," April 2001, entitled "The Right of Return-An Analysis of Recent Debate in the Israeli Press"
"In fact, however, UN General Assembly Resolution 181, which recommended the partition of Palestine into Jewish and Arab states, contained clear provisions for non-discrimination and the protection of minority and religious rights. Moreover, in the proposed Jewish state there would have been basic demographic parity between the Jewish and Palestinian Arab populations in that territory...Israel's denial of the right of Palestinian refugees to return to their homes and lands of origin in order to maintain Jewish demographic majority is based on arbitrary and discriminatory criteria which violate international law and basic moral principles. Such arguments would be equivalent, for example, to discriminatory measures that would aim to maintain a white majority in the United States."
Excerpt from BADIL press release entitled "Nine Days Before Voting ... An Appeal from 32 Arab Human Rights Organizations to Europe to Review its Stance towards the Palestinian Issue", 12 April, 2001
"...the Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies (CIHRS) presented a memorandum to the Swedish ambassador to Cairo, whose country is currently presiding over the European Union (EU), and demanded that the statement be circulated to all of the European governments... The said memorandum constitutes an access to a long-term dialogue with the EU on the dangers of politicization of human rights and employment of double standards. The latter is flagrantly embodied in the exemption of Israel from being held accountable for its grave human rights violations and endowing it with impunity...The memorandum ...notes that the international community has never tolerated such blackmailing for more than 50 years by a state that threatens international peace and security, starts wars, occupies lands, and commits collective massacres and acts of ethnic cleansing which led to the displacement of five million refugees. And yet the international community is not able to subject it to the same standards of accountability applied to some states like Iraq, former Yugoslavia and Indonesia."
Excerpt from "Public Statement by Palestinian Popular and National Organizations", November 20, 2001:
"On October 17, 2001, the New York Times newspaper published an article on a lecture given by Dr. Sari Nusseibeh at Jerusalem's Hebrew University on October 15. In that article, Dr. Nusseibeh is said to have "criticized the Palestinian uprising as hopelessly mired in bloodshed and argued that a peace agreement incorporating a Palestinian state could only be reached if the Palestinians abandoned a longstanding demand for the return of refugees dislocated in war more than 50 years ago to their former homes in Israel."... (Source: Joel Greenberg, "Palestinian Offers Idea: Get Israelis On Our Side", The New York Times, October 17, 2001)... Mr. Nusseibeh's call for the establishment of two ethnic states contradicts the right of every individual refugee to return to his/her homeland. It also goes in contradiction with the struggle of our people inside the Green Line who bitterly suffer every day and every moment from ethnic racism practiced against them. It is worth reminding Dr. Nusseibeh and others that there are 1.3 million Palestinian citizens inside "Israel," among them some 250,000 internally displaced who live as refugees in their homeland, often a very short distance from their original homes and properties. These refugees are denied the right to return to their homes and lands by the ethnic racist state, and they are prevented from practicing their natural right to live on their properties and reap their fruits. This is their fate solely because they are Palestinians... Signatories: ... BADIL Resource Center, Bethlehem, Palestine."
Excerpt from BADIL press release, "US Policy in the Middle East – An Obstacle to Peace--2001 US State Department Human Rights Report and Palestinian Refugee Rights," 11 March 2002:
"The lack of respect for basic human rights in US policy is further illustrated by the recently released US Department of State annual Country Reports on Human Rights Practices...Palestinian Refugees in the US State Department's 2001 Human Rights Report...the 2001 report fails to mention the root cause of Israel's violation of the human rights of Palestinian refugees. The report omits the fact that Israeli law does not provide for the fundamental right to equality. Under the 1992 Basic Law: Human Dignity and Freedom, the definition of Israel as a Jewish state (i.e., a Jewish majority and Jewish control of the land) supersedes the fundamental right to equality...The US Department of State Report on Israel and the Occupied Territories stands in marked contrast to country reports on Bosnia and Kosovo, for example, which include extensive reporting on the right of return and the right to real property restitution of refugees...It is difficult to draw any other conclusion than that the complete and gross omission of Palestinian refugees as a human rights issue is intentional and politically motivated...In this context, and in light of Israel's continued grave breaches of international law, which have only escalated in recent weeks, a systematic and sustained campaign for a total boycott and sanctions against Israel, similar to the anti-apartheid campaign against South Africa, will be necessary to effectuate progress towards a durable solution to the Israeli-Palestinian/Arab conflict... Solidarity with the Palestinian People! End the Ongoing Nakba!
- Boycott Israel – Isolate the Israeli Apartheid Regime
- Promote the Right of Return of Palestinian Refugees
- Campaign against Israeli War Crimes"
Excerpt from "Final Statement--Issued by the 3rd Annual Meeting of the Palestine Right of Return Coalition--Copenhagen, 12 – 15 December 2002:
"The colonialist and racist character of the Zionist project is illustrated by the occupation and forceful displacement of our people, and we affirm that there will be no peace in the Middle East without a guarantee for the refugees' right to return to their homes... Endorsed by:...BADIL Resource Center for Palestinian Residency and Refugee Rights, Palestine"
Excerpt from pres release entitled "UN Committee reviews Israel's Human Rights Performance: "Excessive Emphasis upon the State as a 'Jewish State' Encourages Discrimination (31-May-2003):
"In the context of the current bargaining over the Middle East 'Road Map' the Israeli government is pushing for assurances by all parties that implementation of the Quartet's peace plan will include recognition of Israel as a 'Jewish State,' in order to avoid future challenges of its 55-years old system of institutionalized discrimination against Palestinian citizens and implementation of the right of return of the Palestinian refugees."
Testimony of Abed Al Nasser Alameh, featured in an article entitled "Pursuit of the Criminal and the Raising of the Voice of the Victim: Testimonies at the 21st Anniversary of the Sabra and Shatila Massacre" by Jaber Suleiman in BADIL's quarterly "al-Majdal" from September 2, 2003
"The substance of Israel as a state is expulsion of the Palestinian people from their homeland. Israel was established at the expense of innocent people. Such a state can't claim democracy and it is not qualified to carry out a just trial. Both America and Israel established themselves through genocide of the indigenous populations."
Excerpt from article entitled "The Moral Scandal of our Time" by YahyaYaklef, published in BADIL's quarterly, al-Majdal, June 2004:
"The fundamental nature of the Zionist ideology and culture manifests itself in three main ways: racism, aggression and expansionism. By this I mean, racism that considers the other the enemy, and aggression as a natural consequence of racism which manifests itself through Israel's continuous aggression against the Palestinian people. Finally by expansionism I mean occupation, displacement and expatriation of the Palestinian people destruction of villages, new plans for collective displacement (i.e., transfer policies), in addition to Israel's aspirations for additional territory, and the creation of other new tragic realities on the ground."
Excerpt from article entitled: "Palestinian NGO Consultation for Promotion of a Rights-based Approach to Conflict Resolution" (no author), published in BADIL's quarterly, al-Majdal, June 2004:
"The second workshop (31 May 2004), presented by Golan for Development and AIC/Jadal Cultural Center , focused in the issue of racism inherent in ethnically based national states like Israel..."
Excerpt from "Israel Tries to Tighten Immigration by Following Europe", by Michael Kagan, in "al-Majdal" a quarterly magazine of the BADIL Resource Center for Palestinian Residency and Refugee Rights, issue no. 27, Autumn 2005:
"Israeli politicians often talk about the self-declared Jewish State as something unique, with the Law of Return among its defining features...the fact that Israeli leaders can realistically consider international models shows a great deal about the global state of immigrant rights today. Immigration is the last vestige of racism in international law...Israel's pro-Jewish immigration law is among the most extreme discriminatory immigration laws... But it is not completely unique. Several other countries have immigration laws that make it easier for people of certain national or ethnic backgrounds to obtain citizenship...Hence, in immigration, discrimination remains generally legal, an area of law that seem more rooted in the 19th Century than in the post-World War II human rights era. One has to question how committed governments really are to equality if they insist on retaining the right to discriminate on the essential question of citizenship. Most western immigration laws discriminate against people from Asia, Africa and Latin America, and favor Europeans and North Americans. It should be very disturbing that mainly white northerners have a generally easier time moving around the world than southerners who are mainly people of color. These moral doubts have particular weight in the case of Israel. Israel has made discriminatory immigration central to its national identity in a way that other countries have not...But Israel's denial of Palestinian return still poses the greatest moral challenge to its pro-Jewish immigration policy. Costa Rica's favoritism toward "Ibero-Americans" and Greece's open door toward "ethnic Greeks" do not have such direct connections to ethnic cleansing. Israel is not merely asserting a historical or spiritual connection with Jews; it is simultaneously refusing to acknowledge the historical, cultural and spiritual bonds between Palestinians and their homes in Safad, Majdal, Jaffa, and hundreds of other villages and cities."
(2) GLORIFICATION OF VIOLENCE AND ENCOURAGING TERRORISM
Excerpt from BADIL press release entitled "Palestinian Refugees of Deheishe Camp:
WEEK OF SOLIDARITY WITH THE CHILDREN OF THE ARAB WORLD", 12 October, 1998:
"The flags of Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Iraq and Palestine, five of the Arab countries most effected by current imperialist aggression and sanctions, will be raised during the closing ceremony above the Deheishe camp's memorial for the martyrs of the struggle against the Israeli occupation. Deheishe Camp, children and adults, extend a warm invitation to everybody to come join their events in solidarity with the children in the Arab World.
For more information contact...BADIL Resource Center for Palestinian Residency & Refugee Rights..."
Excerpt from "Concluding Resolutions Issued by the 2nd Coordination Meeting for the Palestinian Coalition for the Right to Return Brussels, 27-30 November 2001":
"A salute of reverence to our martyrs
A salute of appreciation and reverence to our steadfast prisoners in Israeli jails
We shall return to our land... Endorsed by:
BADIL Resource Center for Palestinian Residency and Refugee Rights – Palestine"
Excerpt from BADIL press release entitled: "Coalition for the Palestinian Right of Return Holds Second Annual International Coordinating Meeting in Brussels, 27-30 November 2001--"We Shall Return to Our Land", 5 December 2001":
"The international umbrella organization Coalition for the Palestinian Right of Return successfully concluded its second annual coordinating meeting in Brussels on 30 November 2001. The meeting was coordinated by BADIL Resource Center (Bethlehem)... At the close of the meeting, the participants saluted with deep appreciation the steadfast brothers and sisters carrying out the courageous intifada. Special reverence was paid to the martyrs of the intifada, whose sacrifice is paving the way to the ultimate victories of freedom and return... The following ten organizations participated in the Second Coordinating Meeting: 1. BADIL Resource Center for Palestinian Residency and Refugee Rights - Palestine."
Excerpt from BADIL press release entitled "Arab Civil Forum Meets Prior to Arab Summit--Open Letter to the Arab Summit; Submitted by the Global Palestinian Right-of-Return Coalition", 26 March 2002:
"The Arab Civil Forum, which will close its session today, 26 March, focused its discussion on means to support the Palestinian intifada and Palestinian national independence...The Arab summit is being held in Beirut in circumstances that are exceedingly delicate and dangerous for the central Arab cause, the Palestinian cause...We would have preferred that the focus of the summit might be the support of the brave Palestinian uprising (intifada) by financial, material, political, and diplomatic means. Such support would have provided it with the means to eliminate the occupation from the entire Palestinian territories occupied in 1967 and to establish a sovereign Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital. Such support would have given rise to a new geopolitical reality to compel Israel and the United States to recognize the Palestinian people's national rights of return and self-determination, rather than submerge the Palestinian uprising in a new round of futile negotiations...When will the resolutions of your summits constitute a real bridge for the return to Palestine? Until that time, the refugees will continue to wait for the day, and will not abandon their dreams, their stones, and their brave resistance to the Zionist threat, in defense of all of us at once. Glory to the intifada. We shall return. Signatories:... BADIL Resource Center (Palestine)."
Excerpt from "Final Statement: Issued by the 4th Annual Meeting Palestine Right-of-Return Coalition London, 5-10 November 2003":
"Long live the Intifada
Eternal glory for our pious martyrs
The right of return is the real road map for Palestine. Endorsed by...
BADIL Resource Center for Palestinian Residency and Refugee Rights"
Excerpt from BADIL press release entitled "What Gaza organizations say about the Geneva initiative", 11 December, 2003:
"To promote informed discussion on Palestinians' hopes for a peace agreement, BADIL has been publishing Palestinian views of the Geneva understandings...The following is an unofficial translation of a statement from a group of organizations in the Gaza Strip:
... The national consensus, represented by the right of return, self-determination, and the establishment of a fully sovereign Palestinian state are not subject to interpretation, but goals that everyone must work hard at to achieve. This is the last will and testament of the Martyrs... We support a comprehensive and just peace that is based on international law and UN resolutions. We take upon ourselves and promise to our people, the Martyrs, the injured, and our heroic prisoners to uphold the national consensus and remain faithful to our struggle until full liberation."
Excerpt from BADIL press release entitled "2005 World Social Forum – Porto Alegre:
Global Anti-War Movement Calls for Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions vis-a-vis Israel to End Occupation and Apartheid Policies;" 10 february, 2005:
"The final statement was adopted on 31 January 2005 and includes a detailed call for action on Palestine:
"We support the Palestinian people's struggle for justice, self-determination, a sovereign independent state with Jerusalem as its capital and the implementation of the right of return in accordance with UN resolution 194.
We call upon the international community and governments to impose political and economic sanctions on Israel, including an embargo on armaments. We call upon the social movements to mobilize also for divestment and boycotts. These efforts aim to force Israeli [sic] to implement international resolutions, and the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice, to stop and take down the illegal wall and end all occupation and apartheid policies.
We support the Israeli anti-colonialist, anti-Zionist activists who share this struggle." ...OPGAI, a delegation composed of 10 Palestinian and Syrian civil society organizations including BADIL contributed to this final statement."
Far from a new phenomenon, at the UN Iran has always had plenty of company and the crowd at the UN just got bigger.
|
Print
;){kind=link}
