Saudi Arabia's View on a Palestinian State

With Israel continuing with its punishment of Gaza's civilian population, recent comments from Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan bin Abdullah bin Faisal bin Farhan Al Saud are of particular interest.  

 

Here are bin Farhan's comments on a two-state solution when asked about the reactions of Israel after the formal recognition of a Palestinian state from Norway, Spain and Ireland:

 

Here is a transcript of bin Farhan's views:

"That's the nub of the problem.  The issue of Israel recognizing that a two-state solution is in its own interest.  I firmly believe that a two-state solution, that the establishment of a credible Palestinian state serves not just the interests of the Palestinians.  It delivers their right to self-determination.  It is also in the interest of Israel and delivers the security that Israel needs and deserves and the fact that the current government in Israel doesn't realize that, of course, is a matter of extreme concern.  And, I've said before that we must move towards and, I think, that's one of the issues we discussed today..."

 

And, here's the key:

 

"....we're trying to work towards is building a momentum to reinvigorate the two-state solution independent of Israel's position because Israel doesn't get to decide whether or not the Palestinians have a right to self-determination.  This is something that is enshrined in the United Nations Charter.  It is something that is enshrined into international law.  It is also a founding principle of the United Nations' decision to found Israel so it is absolutely necessary that Israel accepts that it cannot exist without the existence of a Palestinian state, that its security is served by building a Palestinian state."

 

As historical background, on November 29, 1947, the United Nations adopted Resolution 181 which stated the following:

 

"Independent Arab and Jewish States and the Special International Regime for the City of Jerusalem, set forth in part III of this plan, shall come into existence in Palestine two months after the evacuation of the armed forces of the mandatory Power has been completed but in any case not later than 1 October 1948.  The boundaries of the Arab State, the Jewish State, and the City of Jerusalem shall be as described in parts II and III below."

 

Here is how Resolution 181 defined the boundaries of Israel:

 

"The north-eastern sector of the Jewish State (Eastern) Galilee) is bounded on the north and west by the Lebanese frontier and on the east by the frontiers of Syria and Transjordan.  It includes the whole of the Hula Basin, Lake Tiberias, the whole of the Beisan sub-district, the boundary line being extended to the crest of the Gilboa mountains and the Wadi Malih. From there the Jewish State extends north-west, following the boundary described in respect of the Arab State.

  

The Jewish Section of the coastal plain extends from a point between Minat et Qila and Nabi Yunis in the Gaza sub-district and includes the towns of Haifa and Tel-Aviv, leaving Jaffa as an enclave of the Arab State.  The eastern frontier of the Jewish State follows the boundary described in respect of the Arab State.

 

The Beersheba area comprises the whole of the Beersheba sub-district, including the Negeb and the eastern part of the Gaza sub-district, but excluding the town of Beersheba and those areas described in respect of the Arab State.  It includes also a strip of land along the Dead Sea stretching from the Beersheba-Hebron sub-district boundary line to Ein Geddi, as described in respect of the Arab State."

 

Here is a map showing the 1947 partition plan for Palestine which clearly shows that the West Bank and Gaza were to be part of the Arab state:

 

Here are a series of maps showing the dispossession of Palestinians from the land that was granted to them under Resolution 181 since 1946:

 

 

Lastly, here is a map showing the Israeli government's version of its own two-state solution:

 

Saudi Arabia has very significant influence among its peers in the Arab sphere.  These recent comments about Israel's reluctance to implement a two-state solution from a member of the Saudi royal family show that Saudi Arabia's recent moves toward a normalization of diplomatic relations between Saudi Arabia and Israel are dead on arrival.

 

The High Cost of Climate Change Mitigation for Developing Economies

What our politicians rarely mention is that there will be a very high cost to their drive to bring the net zero narrative to fruition.  A study by the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) outlines the high cost of the fight against climate change for developing economies, numbers which should cause concern for those often impoverished citizens living in these nations.

  

Let's start with some background first.  As noted above, the analysis looks at two main global economies, developed and developing economies which are shown on this map:

 

 

The estimates of this study calculated climate change mitigation costs for over 90 economies which represent 72 percent of the global population.  This includes 48 developing economies with 19 of these being classified as low- and lower-middle income and 29 being classified as upper-middle and high-income which, in total, covers 68 percent of people living in developing economies worldwide.  

 

UNCTAD looks at six "transition pathways" to achieve it 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development as shown here:

 

 

For the purposes of this posting, we'll focus on the "Climate change, biodiversity loss and pollution" pathway which "includes strengthening commitments under the Paris Agreement, improving ecosystem management, reducing the effects of disasters and integrating climate and biodiversity actions."

 

The study covers several of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals or SDGs related to climate change including the following indicators:

 

 

The United Nations measures progress on this SDG in several areas; safeguarding marine, freshwater and land biodiversity; bolstering the sustainability of fisheries; increasing forest coverage; preventing land degradation; and halting the extinction of threatened species.

Now, let's look at the numbers.  The total annual cost of accelerating climate change, biodiversity loss and pollution goals between 2023 and 2030 for developing economies is $5.536 trillion or 18 percent of their GDP.  The per capita cost ranges from $397 annually for low and lower-middle income developing nations and $2026 annually for upper-middle and high-income developing nations with an average of $1213 per person annually for all developing nations.

  

Here is a table summarizing the findings of the study:

 

 

What concerns UNCTAD is the spending gap on the climate change sustainable development goal by these nations; the authors of the study note that there is a $337 billion annual funding gap which would require a 6.5 percent increase in annual spending.  What's even more concerning to the United Nations is, that if all developing economies are included, the total annual spending on the climate change SDG would reach up to $7 trillion meaning that the annual gap would be $410 billion.

 

Fortunately for all of us, the United Nations has provided recommendations as quoted here:

 

"Government spending can be tailored to specific national circumstances. These might include enhancing environmental planning and regulation, building climate-resilient infrastructure, promoting clean technologies like carbon capture, developing early warning systems, or restoring and conserving forests and marine life."

  

Keeping in mind that the developing economies included in these calculations have some of the poorest people on earth, it boggles the mind that the United Nations would think that the indebted governments in these nations would have the funding to actually meet the United Nations' climate change sustainable development goals when they struggle to feed their own citizens.

Bob Rae - Canada's Embarrassment at the United Nations

Canada's Permanent Representative to the United Nations and political opportunist Bob Rae tweeted this on April 4, 2022 following the terrorist attack in St. Petersburg Russia which killed journalist/blogger Maxim Tatarsky:

 

 

Apparently, this vitriol did not go unnoticed by the Russians as shown here:

 

 

Reading through Bob Rae's Twitter feed gives us a sense of how thoroughly anti-Russian propaganda has consumed this so-called diplomat.  Rather than taking a discrete and professional approach to Russia, Mr. Rae has taken a "no prisoners" approach, disparaging Russia and Vladimir Putin multiple times a day.  One would have to wonder when he actually has time to do the job that he's being paid to do.  While he loves to tout the lack of human rights in other nations, he conveniently seems to have forgotten that Justin Trudeau who appointed him to his position at the United Nations thought nothing of squashing the rights of millions of Canadians during the COVID-19 pandemic whose only "crime" was to disagree with him.

  

But, then again, when Canada's de factor Prime Minister and sworn enemy of Russia, Chrystia Freeland, is providing Liberal Canadian government officials with their talking points, what else would anyone expect?

The United Nations and #ThinkBeforeSharing - Guardians of the Truth and Destroyers of Conspiracy Theories

The United Nations through its agency, UNESCO which, ironically has the mantra "Building peace in the minds of men and women" has anointed itself as the great protector of the narrative through its new "#ThinkBeforeSharing" campaign.  Let's look at how the future global government sees its role in the new, disinformation-free world.

 

Here is the UNESCO's #ThinkBeforeSharing start webpage:

 

UNESCO claims the following with my bold:

 

"The COVID-19 pandemic has sparked a worrying rise in disinformation and conspiracy theories. Conspiracy theories can be dangerous: they often target and discriminate against vulnerable groups, ignore scientific evidence and polarize society with serious consequences. This needs to stop."

 

Those are big words from an agency that is relatively meaningless in the grand scheme of things...at least until the United Nations takes over as the world's sole government (another conspiracy theory unless you dig a bit below the surface?).

 

UNESCO's Director-General, Audrey Azoulay:

 

...who has this background:

 

 

...has this to say about "conspiracy theories":

 

"Conspiracy theories cause real harm to people, to their health, and also to their physical safety. They amplify and legitimize misconceptions about the pandemic, and reinforce stereotypes which can fuel violence and violent extremist ideologies."

  

The "#ThinkBeforeSharing" campaign is being implemented jointly with the European Commission, Twitter and the World Jewish Congress.  The purpose of the campaign is as follows:

 

"A new campaign helps you learn how to identify, debunk, react to and report on conspiracy theories to prevent their spread. Check out the infographics and social media pack below and help spread the word that facts matter and no one is to blame. Thinking critically and being informed about conspiracy theories is key to challenging them."

 

I like the part about "thinking critically" which, is in fact, what the campaign does NOT want us to do, rather, it prefer that we just accept its definition of conspiracy theories rather than using our own minds to distinguish truth from disinformation, no matter the source.

  

UNESCO is so kind as to provide us with several infographic pertinent to the "ThinkBeforeSharing ".  A line in the first one caught my attention because it seems very self-serving given that the United Nations is behind the campaign:

 

 

Here's the key line which defines conspiracy theories according to UNESCO and its partners:

 

"The belief that events are secretly manipulated behind the scenes by powerful forces with negative intent."

 

One word - irony.

  

Here's another infographic which will help the intellectually challenged serf class to determine what is and what is not a conspiracy theory:

 

Here's an infographic showing how conspiracy theories are dangerous:

 

 

Apparently conspiracy theories can result in "mistrust of public institutions which can lead to political apathy or radicalization".  Of course, this mistrust wouldn't be in anyway created by the kakistocratic nature of the political class in today's world, would it?

 

Here is an infographic showing the link between conspiracy theories and antisemitism which explains the participation of the World Jewish Congress in this campaign:

 

Noting the mention of George Soros, it would be interesting to know how much he has invested in this campaign.  It also bears noting that Audrey Azoulay, the Director-General of UNESCO, was born into a Moroccan Jewish family.

 

While there are additional infographics, the subject matter of this one caught my attention:

 

You've got to feel sorry for those poor folks caught in a spiderweb of conspiracy theories.

  

Let's close this posting with one thought that some of have learned over the past two and a half years:

 

"The difference between conspiracy theories and reality is about six months."

  

Perhaps if governments spent less time and energy by repeatedly lying to and trying to hide things from voters, the formation of conspiracy theories would subside.

 

If you have a couple of hours to spare and you wish to learn more about the "#ThinkBeforeSharing" campaign and how conspiracy theories can be addressed though education, you might want to watch this video of a symposium held on June 27, 2022 regarding the issue:

 

The United Nations and Private Land Ownership - Setting the Stage for Farmland Expropriation

It certainly appears that society is on the cusp of major change, particularly if the ruling class gets its way with the serf class.  In past centuries and in some nations today, the vast majority of land was/is owned by a very small minority of the wealthy class or governments who use (and abuse) the peasants who own no land and use their labour to further enrich the most prosperous.  While the current oligarchs are taking the steps necessary to move society toward a "you will own nothing" future, particularly as part of the Great Reset, this was set in place nearly five decades ago during a meeting in Vancouver, Canada.

 

The United Nations Conference on Human Settlements also known as the Habitat I meeting was held in Canada from May 31 to June 11, 1976:

 

For my Canadian readers, you might it interesting to know that the father of Canada's current prime minister, Pierre Elliot Trudeau, a student of the socialist British Labour Party intellectual Harold Lasky at the London School of Economics, was in attendance.

Here is some background on the meeting which was convened at the behest of the United Nations General Assembly:

 

"Habitat I was the first United Nations Conference on Human Settlements. It took place in Vancouver, Canada, from 31 May-11 June 1976. The United Nations General Assembly convened the Habitat I conference as governments began to recognize the need for sustainable human settlements and the consequences of rapid urbanisation, especially in the developing world. At that time, urbanisation and its impacts were barely considered by the international community, but the world was starting to witness the greatest and fastest migration of people into cities and towns in history as well as rising urban population through natural growth resulting from advances in medicine.

 

Member States recognized that the circumstances of life for vast numbers of people were unacceptable, particularly in developing countries, and that, unless positive and concrete action was taken to find solutions, those conditions were likely to be further aggravated.

 

There were inequalities in living conditions, social segregation, racial discrimination, acute unemployment, illiteracy, disease and poverty, the breakdown of social relationships and traditional cultural values and the increasing degradation of life-supporting resources of air, water and land."

 

As a result of the meeting which gets almost no attention today, the Vancouver Declaration on Human Settlements (aka the Vancouver Action Plan) was created, providing the first definition of "adequate shelter" and recommendations for each of the U.N.'s member states to meet the goals. Here is a quote from the Guidelines for Action of the Declaration of Principles of the Vancouver Declaration stated that 

"Adequate shelter and services are a basic human right which places an obligation on Governments to ensure their attainment by all people, beginning with direct assistance to the least advantaged through guided programmes of self-help and community action. Governments should endeavour to remove all impediments hindering attainments of these goals. Of special importance is the elimination of social and racial segregation, inter alia, through the creation of better balanced communities, which blend different social groups, occupation, housing and amenities." 

 

As is typical of the United Nations, this proclamation appears to be noble on the surface, however, when you dig into the Vancouver Action Plan, there are several issues that are of concern.  Here is Section D of the Plan which outlines the United Nations plan for land with the pertinent sections highlighted:

This is the key to the United Nation's philosophy on land ownership:

 

"Private land ownership is also a principal instrument of accumulation and concentration of wealth and therefore contributes to social injustice; if unchecked, it may become a major obstacle in the planning and implementation of development schemes. Social justice, urban renewal and development, the provision of decent dwellings-and healthy conditions for the people can only be achieved if land is used in the interests of society as a whole....

 

Land is one of the most valuable natural resources and it must be used rationally. Public ownership or effective control of land in the public interest is the single most important means or improving the capacity of human settlements to absorb changes and movements in population, modifying their internal structure and achieving a more equitable distribution of the benefits or development whilst assuring that environmental impacts are considered...."

 

Land is a scarce resource whose management should be subject to public surveillance or control in the interest of the nation."

  

That could not be clearer, could it?  The United Nations which in its dreams becomes the sole global government believes that individual land ownership should be abolished because it leads to social injustice.

 

We are already seeing signs of this move toward government control of land ownership in the Netherlands where farmers are being squeezed from their land as the government imposes strict measures on farmers up to and including expropriation and forced sale, the Biden Administration's "Conserving and Restoring America the Beautiful campaign and Executive Order 14008 as shown here:

 

 

...and the United Nation's New Global Framework for Managing Nature Through 2030 as shown here:

 

In a future posting, we'll take a closer look at the 30 by 30 narrative being promoted as part of the United Nations' Sustainable Development Goals or SDGs.

  

While it has taken nearly half a century for the United Nations to implement its draconian and self-serving land ownership agenda, it is becoming increasingly clear that their plans are accelerating.  Governments learned that they can use fear of disease to control their citizens during the COVID-19 pandemic and, under the guise of reducing the impact of global climate change, the plan to shift control of land from private land owners to governments (and, ultimately, under the control of the one world government proposed by the United Nations itself), it certainly appears that the concept of land ownership will follow.  After all, the U.N. and its partner the World Economic Forum have clearly stated that ownership will become obsolete in the upcoming "sharing economy".

The United Nations and World Hunger Satire

As is typical of the global ruling class, sometimes they say out loud things that should have remained unspoken or, in this case, unwritten.  An article by George Kent, currently an adjunct professor in the Department of Peace and Conflict Studies at the University of Sydney in Australia, Professor Emeritus at the University of Hawaii and Member of the Board of Directors of the International Peace Research Association Foundation as shown here:

 

...which appeared on the United Nations UN Chronicle website in 2008 ago has now resurfaced, much to the embarrassment and chagrin of the global ruling class.

 

Thanks to the Wayback Machine, here is a screen capture showing the entire article:

 

Here is another screen capture showing the article as it appeared in the United Nations Chronicle Edition Numbers 2 and 3 from 2008 as it currently appears on the University of Hawaii website which has also been archived on the Wayback Machine:

 

 

Since the contents of the article are protected by a copyright held by the United Nations, I am loathe to quote from the document, however, in general, the article takes the viewpoint that hunger is a great motivator of human beings and is fundamental to the functioning of the world's economy.  It is largely because people need to purchase food to assuage their hunger that they are willing to work essentially as slaves, earning subsistence level wages.  The author notes that hunger is caused by low-paying jobs, however, hunger also causes low-paying jobs to be created.

 

Here is a very brief quote:

 

"Much of the hunger literature talks about how it is important to assure that people are well fed so that they can be more productive. That is nonsense. No one works harder than hungry people. Yes, people who are well nourished have greater capacity for productive physical activity, but well-nourished people are far less willing to do that work."

 

He goes on to conclude that ending global hunger would be a disaster because it would leave the economy without the low-paying jobs like harvesting vegetables and cleaning toilets.  In fact, he concludes that "hunger is not a problem, it is an asset".

 

As I noted at the beginning of this posting, this brief article recently resurfaced after lying dormant for 14 years much to the chagrin of the United Nations.  When you click on the link to the article on the United Nations website (found here), this is what you now get:

 

 

On July 6, 2022, the United Nations Chronicle tweeted this in response to the discovery of their callousness:

 

 

Perhaps the United Nations is concerned that we don't realize that satire is part of their business model.  Now that they've been caught red-handed, the serf class must conclude that a future global government led by the United Nations will be a non-stop comedy show....at our expense, of course.

  

Oh yes, and if the braintrust at the United Nations was half as smart as they think that they are, they would realize that scrubbing this incriminating article from their website has been a complete failure given the existence of the Wayback Machine, not to mention the presence of the article on the University of Hawaii website.  Apparently, they need to learn that the internet never forgets anything!

 

The Twitter Spat Between Canada and Russia

Over the past month, Canada's Trudeau government has received a great deal of negative press from the world's media, both mainstream and less mainstream for their heavy-handed response to the truckers' convoy, moves which included the tyrannical threat to lock down the bank accounts of Canadians who were deemed to have participated in unacceptable behaviour.  As you will see in this posting, the Trudeau government has, once again, exhibited its level of immaturity on the international stage when it comes to the Russian actions in Ukraine.

  

Russia's Ambassador to the United Nations, Vasily Nebenzya, sent a letter to the United Nations on March 16, 2022 requesting support for its draft resolution on the provision of aid and protection of civilians in Ukraine.  The U.N Security Council was slated to vote on the draft resolution on Friday March 18, however, the vote was cancelled but not withdrawn at the request of Russia's ambassador because  of what he termed "unprecedented pressure" from Western nations, most particularly the United States.  The draft resolution was criticized by the West for not mentioning Russia's invasion of Ukraine.

  

Of course, thanks to the aforementioned Justin Trudeau, Canada being a highly respected and feared world power, felt it necessary to weigh in.  Here is a tweet dated March 16, 2022 from Canada's Mission to the United Nations:

 

The brilliant minds of the Trudeau government thought that the world would appreciate their heavy editing of Russia's letter which turned out as follows:

 

 

Of course, Russia's First Deputy Permanent Representative of Russia to the United Nations felt it necessary to respond to this rather atypical example of international diplomacy:

 

 

As I have noted before, there are so many moving parts in the Ukraine narrative.  While Russia certainly is not to be commended for invading a sovereign nation, there are issues in Ukraine that concerned Russia's leadership, many of which are linked to Washington's actions in the 2014 Maidan uprising:

 

1.) Ukraine's recent threat to acquire nuclear weapons.

 

2.) The eight year war between Ukraine and the breakaway republics of Donetsk and Luhansk whose majority Russian population voted to secede from Ukraine.  This war has resulted in the deaths of thousands of civilians and has severely damaged the region's infrastructure.

 

3.) The persecution of Russian-speaking citizens of Ukraine.

 

4.) The influential presence of Neo-Nazi members in the Ukraine's military.

 

5.) The centuries-long history of Ukraine as part of Russia that goes back to Tsarina Catherine the Great.

 

5.) Most importantly, the threatened expansion of NATO into Ukraine.

 

Just as they did throughout the pandemic, the Trudeau government has taken the approach that all issues are both simplistic and black and white, for example, either you get vaccinated or you lose your rights.  In this case, rather than taking the time to look at the issues and history behind Russia's actions, Justin Trudeau and his Deputy Prime Minister and Canadian-Ukrainian Chrystia Freeland, the architect of the confiscation of Canadians' bank accounts, have chosen to take the virtue-signalling route that appeals to their personal sense of right and wrong.  While the Trudeau government's editing of Russia's letter seems entertaining on the surface, it does little to improve Canada's extremely poor diplomatic relationship with Russia and its standing as a mature nation, worthy of a non-permanent seat on the United Nations' Security Council, something that Canada's man-child and beta male prime minister had sought back in 2020:

 

Justin, here is some advice.  If you want to be taken seriously, you need to start acting your age, think for yourself and stop listening to the red-dressed globalist tyrant who sits to your right in the House of Commons.  She doesn't have your best interests at heart and is counting the days until she takes your place as Canada's political leader.