News

Friedman says the West Bank is certainly Jewish but the problem is that it has too much indigenous people

Occupied Jerusalem (QNN)- US Ambassador to the occupation state David Friedman on Wednesday spoke at a conference in occupied Jerusalem, announcing US intention to recognize the West Bank as part of the occupation state and claiming that the illegal settlements are not in violation of international law.

“Since coming here I’ve worked to add one more item to a busy agenda: helping to find a fix to the issues that still linger from the Six Day War”, he said in the conference at which he and Netanyahu spoke.

Friedman adopted the Israeli narration about the 1967 war in which the Zionists occupied the West Bank, the Golan Heights, and Gaza, claiming that “in just six days of battle, Israel tripled in size, gained critical buffers against its enemies, reunited Jerusalem and demonstrated to the entire world that it was here to stay.”

“But it didn’t make peace with everyone and when we came into office the lingering issues included three of significant importance: the status of 1) Jerusalem, 2) the Golan Heights and 3) Judea and Samaria. We have approached them in ascending order of complexity.

He also claimed that Jerusalem is the capital of “Israel” according to “biblical history” and US law.

I thank God that President Trump had the courage and the wisdom to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and move our embassy to Jerusalem from Tel Aviv”, he added.

He described the US decision to deem the West Bank settlements legal as “certainly the most complicated of the issues because of the large indigenous Palestinian population.”

Friedman claimed that the West Bank is Jewish because its Jewish name is simply very Jewish.

“Judea and Samaria – the name Judea says it all – is territory that historically had an important Jewish presence,” he said.

Interestingly, he also stated that following the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, Palestine (which the Zionists have always denied it existed) was occupied by the British forces, but then he comes to the strange conclusion that Palestine, being under the British mandate, was rightfully owned by the British and had to be exclusively granted for the Jews.

“After the Ottoman Empire fell, Judea and Samaria, along with the rest of what was then referred to as Palestine, became subject to a British Trust which was subject to the Balfour Declaration, the terms of the San Remo conference and the League of Nations Mandate. In simple terms, the British were obliged to facilitate settlement of the Jewish People in this land. That’s not to say that Jewish settlement was exclusive, that no one else had the right to live there. But Jews certainly did.

“So, intuitively, who has a good claim to the land? Israel, whose historical and legal rights were recognized by the League of Nations, Jordan, which was there for only 19 years with virtually no legitimacy, and which, in any event renounced its claim to territory West of the Jordan River in 1995, or the Ottomans who washed their hands of Palestine after WWI. The answer, with all due respect to all the scholars, seems obvious.”

Show More

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Close