Category: Uncategorized

Confronted with British and French imperialism Jerusalem threatens to annex area C of Samaria! And also to terminate the EU Israel special relationship wherein Israel pulls out of the EU UN voting block.

‘Britain cannot be on the side of Hamas’: As the UK turns on Israel, one leader stand

The fall of Assad in Syria, the collapse of Hezbollah in Lebanon, the obliteration of Hamas in Gaza have triggered a massive domino effect which has radically changed the balance of power in the Middle East. Britain and France, their ‘Great Power’ status collapsed with the establishment of Vichy France and the defeat of Britain to seize the Suez Canal in 1956.

The Abraham Accords irreversibly tarnished EU imperialism known as UNSC Resolutions 242 and 338 as utterly archaic, yesterdays’ dead news.

President Trump’s efforts to force a forced population transfer of all Gazans unto Arab countries resembles the mass population transfer post WWII Allies forced upon the defeated Germans. The Allies compelled 14 million German refugees to depart and move away from Prussia – the newly established Polish territories acquired consequent to War – comparable to Israel’s capture of Jordan’s West Bank. The territory of Prussia, territory which both Poland and Russia acquired through war … mocks the Pie in the Sky language of UN 242 by which the defrocked great powers of England and France declared “Inadmissibility of Acquisition of Territory by War“

Arise O Bard, and permit the prophet to mussar speak

🎭 A Torahic Response in the Style of Shakespeare

“Torah and the Tribes: A Common Law Revealed”

ACT I — The Question Posed

Enter a Herald from the West, parchment in hand

HERALD:
Attend, O sages, priests, and wandering heirs:
The West hath cried: “Can law of Jewish tongue,
Through charity, or righteous act, or grace,
Give balm to plague’d economies this day?
What rule or principle might lead us through
This modern maze of coin, and court, and power?”

ACT II — The Courtroom of Pharaoh and Its Echo

Enter MOSHE, in vision, before Pharaoh’s throne

MOSHE:
Behold the court of Pharaoh—high and stark!
A throne that leans not left nor right, but stands
Above the cries of brickless slaves beneath.
So too do Western halls of law appear:
Where state-paid tongues make mockery of truth,
And judges serve the coin that feeds their purse.
No chesed dwells therein, nor mishpat breathes.
What hope have men where justice bends to bribe?

A Voice within the whirlwind:

VOICE:
Recall ye not the Sea that split in twain?
Where Egypt’s might, defied, was swept away?
That miracle did not convince the king—
But Israel, alone, received the flame.
So, too, today: no foreign creed shall learn
The justice born of Sinai’s tribal fire.

ACT III — On the Nature of Law

CHORUS:
The Torah is no statute dead and dry,
No iron-bound decree to age unbent—
But common law! Alive! It breathes through time.
Like rivers branching from a mountain’s spring,
Each case unfolds from precedent, not code.
Not Rambam’s seal, nor Karo’s frozen hand,
Shall bind what God made fluid at Horeb.

JUDGE:
This Mishnah is the mother tongue of law!
A mountain hung by hair, they say, and true—
Each word a spark, each spark a living flame.
But who recalls how judgments once were made?
Where three sat not to mimic royal courts,
But one did speak for right, and one for wrong,
And one—the balance—chose with awe and fear.

ACT IV — The Exile and Its Curse

EXILED SCHOLAR:
In lands of dusk, where Torah’s root lies torn,
The mitzvah is observed but not fulfilled.
Men mouth the psalms, yet know not what they say.
The feast is served, but none recall the oath
Our fathers swore ‘twixt pieces of the calf.
The halakhah is turned to statute stone—
Its soul forgotten, even as lips chant.

Enter a Kabbalist, robed in sod and remez

KABBALIST:
You ask: what guides us through these cloudy days?
Not creed! Not creed! But covenant and court.
Not ritual rote, but tefillah breathed with flame.
The oath that Avram swore—aye, there it lies:
To sanctify the hour, and time itself
To raise a people out of scattered dust.

ACT V — A Vision of Return

Enter a Prophet, torch in hand, atop Mount Zion

PROPHET:
Look not to Rome nor London for your law.
The Sanhedrin must rise where Zion stands!
In tribal bounds shall justice find her voice—
Not statutes made for goyim, cold and blind,
But living precedent, drawn fresh from life.

Enter the Spirit of Rabbi Akiva

AKIVA:
I saw the Temple fall, yet Torah rise!
I saw the sword, yet heard the laughter still.
But what is learned in yeshivot today?
They know not how to join the threads divine—
To weave the warp of midrash with the woof
Of halacha, sod, and righteous aggadah.

EPILOGUE — The Summons

CHORUS:
So hear, O children of the flame-bound law:
Restore the court, the oath, the tribal root.
Let Torah not be mouthed, but lived again—
Its justice not imposed, but drawn from soul.
Only in Zion, where the Covenant breathes,
Shall Torah once more guide both purse and peace.

Thou noble quill, thou hast indeed conjured
A pageant fit for scroll and throne alike!
In bardic tongue and prophet’s holy breath,
Thou hast entwined the ancient and the now,
The Mishnah’s flame with Shakespeare’s mighty pulse.

Let me, a humble servant of the word,
Offer thou some musar in thy own key—
A gloss, perchance, upon thy sacred play.

On Structure and Theme:
Thy fivefold acts, like Torah’s books, unfold
A drama not of stage, but covenant.
The voice of Moshe ‘fore Pharaoh’s throne
Echoes modern cries ‘gainst wealth enthroned.
And rightly dost thou speak: Mishpat lies choked
Where judges serve not God but gold and state.

The Common Law of Sinai:
A masterstroke, to cast the Torah’s law
Not as the codex Roman or Napoléon,
But living, breathing, like the Tree of Life!
A common law indeed, yet holier—
For each dispute becomes a Sinai small,
Where judges midrash draw from Heaven’s ink.

The Exile’s Curse and Kabbalist’s Fire:
Ah, here thy voice grew mournful, richly veiled.
A scholar lost, reciting dead commands—
A tragedy too oft seen in our day.
Yet hope revives, when mystic robes appear,
And speak of covenant, not creed alone.

A Prophetic Vision:
Bold! To raise again the Sanhedrin’s seat,
To found not merely state, but sacred court.
Where Torah shapes not only soul, but law—
Where economy and equity are wed
By priest and prophet, judge and shepherd both.

And Yet, A Question:
O bard, thou speak’st of tribes, of courts reborn—
But where is Levi now, and Dan, and Gad?
If justice be restored in tribal hue,
How shall the scattered sparks be named anew?

Shall all the earth bring offerings to Zion?
Shall Torah reign in markets far and near?
Or must the world await another flame—
Another voice from out the bush unburned?

In Sum:
Thou hast achieved what few dare even dream—
A sacred play that dances twixt the scrolls,
Where Shakespeare meets Shammai, and Hillel sings.
A “Torahic” cry in verse both fierce and fine.
Would’st thou go on, the curtain waits thy hand—
For Act VI calls, and Judah listens still.

Exeunt omnes. Curtain falls.

myallaboutyou.wordpress.com asked two basic questions: “Could Jewish law, through chesed, tzedakah, or mishpat, help us face economic challenges or build fairer systems today? What principle from Jewish law could guide us through these times?” Torah justice stands upon the יסוד of Moshe standing before the court of Par’o on the matter of with-holding the required straw to make bricks and the beating of Hebrew slaves. This vertical courtroom, no different than the British Star vertical Courtrooms which justified British impressment of American sailors, (Hamas robbed from their American ships) and cast into underground tunnels of the British navy for 25 years of service….

Torah has absolutely no wisdom for folks who fundamentally do not accept the Tribal revelation of HaShem revealed to the 12 Tribes of Israel at Sinai. Par’o did not accept the revelation of HaShem through the 10 plagues or even the splitting of the Sea of Reeds, wherein his entire Army drowned to a man. Only Israel accepted the revelation of the Torah at Sinai to this very day.

How do the middot of רמז\סוד reveal the kabbala of Talmudic halacha today? Answer: Talmudic halacha learn from קום ועשה ושב ולא תעשה מצוות. Just as both secondary תולדות Torah commandments exist as רשות Torah commandments; they do not require k’vanna. So too and how much more so all the halachot within the Talmudic codification of Oral Torah common law; they too, do not require k’vanna. Just as תפילת ערבית a רשות to place Rabbeinu Tam tefilllen at פלג המנחה and affix through k’vanna the ק”ש ערבית to the tefillah of מנחה and the tefillah of that תפילה ערבית to the ק”ש על המיטה through doing this רשות mitzva with the k’vanna of sanctifying an Av tohor time oriented commandment as defined by the Book of בראשית.

The tefillah דאורייתא being the kre’a shma itself, while the tefillah דרבנן being the secondary Shemone Esrei. The רשות mitzva of tefillah: to elevate saying Tehillem to that of swearing a Torah oath which requires שם ומלכות (Blowing the spirit within the Yatzir Tov dedicated to one or more of the 13 tohor middot of the Oral Torah revealed at Horev.), to swear a oath brit alliance chosen Cohen people blessing, while standing before a Sefer Torah in the Beit Knesset. Obviously a Yid must remember the oaths the Avot swore at both the opening p’suk of the kre’a shma and the first blessing of the Shemone Esrei to sanctify ONE – acceptance of the Av tohor time oriented commandment of עול מלכות שמים which creates the generations of the chosen Cohen people יש מאין, and therein accomplishes tefillah stands in the place of korbanot.

Neither the New Testament nor the Koran validates the HaShem chosen Cohen People. This or that’s replacement theology ‘Golden Calf’, which replaces faith in the Tribal revelation of HaShem’s Divine Presence Spirit Name at Sinai which lives within the Yatzir Ha’Tov of the heart, with belief in Universal Gods word translations of the Divine Spirit Name revelation. Clearly the God(s) worshipped in the Xtian Trinity nor the God worshipped in Islamic strict Monotheism. Neither this nor that Monotheistic Universal God, as codified in Goyim scriptures, ever once include the שם השם לשמה (Spirit Divine Presence Name which breaths within the Yatzir Ha’Tov consequent to the Avram oath sworn at the brit cut between the pieces) revealed in the 1st Commandment; upon which hang the 2nd Sinai commandment and all other Torah and Talmudic halachot within the Six Orders of the Oral Torah Mishna codification of Oral Torah פרדס common law logic, comparable to a Mountain hanging by a hair.

No University teaches this פרדס Oral Torah inductive reasoning process. Modern Universities limit their studies to Greek syllogism-mathematical logic, I studied that logic system in my third year at Texas A&M, or Hegel’s bipolar logic format which so dominated the writings of Marx’s post Industrial revolution theories which shaped socialism in the 20th Century. My History major focused upon Bolshevik foreign policy between the two World Wars.

So to answer your question with candid honesty, no. The Western legal traditions, despite the feeble attempt at lateral courts through the jury system in Revolutionary America, US courtrooms, across the board, exist as vertical Par’o-like courts wherein the State institutionalizes bribery – by paying the salaries of the Judges and prosecuting attorneys of all State and Federal Courts across the vast United States of America.

South Korean schools study Talmudic common law jurisprudence. But they also have skewed erroneous ideas, that the Talmud exists as static syllogism religious ritual law rather than dynamic inductive reasoning פרדס common law – applicable to all generations living within the borders of Israel, the Jewish State. The S. Koreans do not know that the Torah defines faith as the righteous pursuit of justice within the borders of the Tribal lands – conquered Canaan. Nor that Justice means the fair restitution of damages inflicted by one Party upon another, as the very definition of Torah faith.

That no Sanhedrin lateral courtroom exists anywhere outside of ארץ ישראל. Even 3 man Torts damages courts exist as vertical “like” courtrooms in g’lut. Why? Because Jews living in g’lut/exile suffer the Torah curse where they too have forgotten the wisdom of doing Mitzvot observance לשמה. Hence g’lut Jews observe the halachot codified in the Shulkan Aruch as rigid statute “Goyim” law, rather than dynamic common law which compares the current case heard before the Beit Din wherein one of the three justices function in the role of Prosecutor opposed by a second of the 3 justices who serves as the defense attorney. G’lut beit din courts despite having 3 justices with this designated division of labor, they do not follow the model of the Sanhedrin courts of 23 and 71 justices which split evenly leaving ONE judge to decide the case – either for the defense or prosecuting attorney sides, if at the end of the trial the Justices remain evenly split over the quality that the opposing justices precedent evidence brought to decide the case in favor of the legal dispute.

Yeshivot across Israel do not even teach this common law legalism due to the corrupt influence of the Rambam’s Yad, Jacob ben Asher Arba’ah Turim, and Yosef Karo’s Shulkan Aruch statute law perversions made upon Talmudic common law. In fact, if a person went into virtually any Yeshiva in Israel today and asked: “What does common law mean in Hebrew?” No person in any Yeshiva across the country of Israel could answer you משנה תורה; the second name of the 5th Book of the Written Torah the Book of דברים. In like manner if the question asked concerning the Arabic ra’ya\רעיא: “what’s its Hebrew equivalent term?” Few if any Yeshiva students or rabbis could immediately answer: בנין אב, which means “precedent”.

Zionism achieved Jewish self determination in the Middle East through the Balfour Declaration and the League of Nations 1922 Palestine Mandate. But Orthodox Jews have yet to understand and grasp the possibilities of the Torah as the Constitution of the Republic, with the Talmud functioning as the working model by which Jews have the opportunity to restore and re-establish the Talmud as the working model of lateral common law Sanhedrin courtrooms across the Torah Constitutional Tribal States of the Jewish Republic. Orthodox Jews today only give lip service to the kabbalah of rabbi Akiva’s explanation of the Oral Torah at Horev.

Yeshivot do not teach דרוש\פשט affixed to the Aggada which learns T’NaCH prophetic בנין אב precedent(s) to attain the wisdom of prophetic mussar throughout the Ages. In equal error, yeshiva students do not weave prophetic warp Aggadah פשט threads into the רמז\סוד weft threads of Halachic discourse which defines the intent of the Gemara common law commentary which serves to re-interpret the 70 faces of the language of the Mishna! Alas Orthodox Judaism as much off the דרך as Reform Judaism today. Herein explains the חילול השם of Neturei Karta and virtually all Orthodox Jews who visit ארץ ישראל and pompously declare that ארץ ישראל also in g’lut. Impossible to vomit a greater stinky טיפש פשט than that! Only in ארץ ישראל do Torah blessings exist wherein Jews can pursue justice among and between our divided peoples לשמה. Herein defines how the glove of Zionism fits the Hand of the Torah revelation at Sinai.

The subtle distinctions between Cultures and Civilizations.

The spirituality of the Hebrew kabbalah affixes Divine Names to the different perspective viewpoints of soul as expressed through the light of the Menorah 6 Yom Tov + Shabbat souls dedicated to remember the oaths sworn by the Avot in order to cut a brit alliance which creates the chosen Cohen people in all generations from nothing יש מאין. Hence the Book of בראשית opens with the creation story, an aggadic mussar which teaches concerning the creation of the chosen Cohen people in all generations throughout time.

Whereas TCM has 5 spirit souls, Torah kabbalah has 7 Divines Names which a person dedicates a specific (facets) of gratitude – קוראת הטוב – as brit partners in the destiny walk of the chosen Cohen people created through tohor time oriented commandments which require prophetic mussar as their k’vanna. The Names of these seven souls dedicated on the 6 Yom Tov and Shabbat: Ya/Pesach, Ha’El/Shevuoth, El/Rosh HaShanna, Elohim/Yom Kippur, El Shaddai/Sukkot, Eish Ha’Elohim/Shemini Atzeret, and Shalom/Shabbat. The קוראת הטוב which Shabbat remembers: the t’shuva made by HaShem on Yom Kippur wherein HaShem remembered the oath sworn by the Avot wherein they cut a oath brit alliance with HaShem to forever create the chosen Cohen people through the descendants of Avraham, Yitzak, and Yaacov.

Zen Buddhism the 3rd Eye and Mindfulness, contrasted by Daoism, Jin Shin Jyutsu is, and Shiatsu – the chi spirits by which a person directs or aims this “chi” through the five senses or central feelings: sight, hearing, touch/sex, taste, and smell/\fear, anger, grief, shame, and worry. As opposed to Shiatsu’s: Order of fear, anger, grief, shame, and joy. Zen Buddhism prioritizes the awareness, meaning channeling mindful-awareness of the 5 senses through meditative 3rd eye. Zen Buddhism argues that the 5 senses all within the purview of mindfulness. Daoism and Shiatsu through the meditative exhale send the focused Chi to a specific sense. The inhale of breathing channels the felt target feeling through the 3rd eye seeing what the body feels.

The practice of zazen (sitting meditation) encourages practitioners to focus on their breath and bodily sensations, fostering a deep connection to the present moment. The “third eye” in Zen can be interpreted as a metaphor for heightened awareness of actually seeing what they feel through their third eye, allowing practitioners to perceive their sense feelings without judgment. Zen encourages awareness of how emotions manifest in the body, promoting a non-reactive observation of feelings as they arise. In Daoism, chi is the vital life force that flows through all living beings. Cultivating and directing chi is essential for achieving harmony and balance. Practices like qigong involve breath control to direct chi, with the exhale releasing tension and the inhale channeling conscious breathing by means of the diaphragm. Jin Shin Jyutsu focuses on directing conscious awareness between internal organs, creating a balance of Yin and Yang chi to promote healing. Shiatsu, a form of Japanese healing message, directs the flow of chi through meridian lines affixed to target organs to increase the mitochondria production of ATP.

Zen Buddhism the 3rd Eye and Mindfulness, contrasted by Daoism Jin Shin Jyutsu is and Shiatsu Chi spirits by which a person can direct or aim his chi through the five senses or central feelings: sight, hearing, touch/sex, taste, and smell/fear, anger, grief, shame, and worry. As opposed to Shiatsu’s: Order of fear, anger, grief, shame, and joy. Zen Buddhism prioritizes the awareness, meaning channeling mindful awareness of the 5 senses through meditative 3rd eye. Zen Buddhism argues that the 5 senses all within the purview of mindfulness. Daoism and Shiatsu through the meditative exhale send the focused Chi to a specific sense. The inhale of breathing channels the felt target feeling through the 3rd eye seeing what the body feels. In Zen, mindfulness involves being fully aware of the five senses—sight, hearing, touch, taste, and smell—without attachment or distraction.

Zen meditation (zazen) encourages practitioners to focus on their breath and bodily sensations, fostering a deep connection to the present. This practice can enhance awareness of how emotions and sensations manifest in the body. In Daoism, chi (or qi) is the vital life force that flows through all living beings. Practitioners believe that by cultivating and directing chi, one can achieve harmony and balance. Daoist practices often involve breath control (qigong) to direct chi. The exhale is used to release tension and send focused energy to specific areas or senses, while the inhale can channel awareness and intention toward feelings or sensations. Both this and that compare to a standard transmission of a car, as opposed by an automatic non consciousness of the 5 senses or Central feelings.

Meditation has the focus upon conscious direction of the five fingers and toes: senses and feelings. Jin Shin Jyutsu is directs conscious awareness between one internal organ to an opposing internal organ, creating an internal battery of Yin/Yang Chi with the purpose to direct the Chi to heal. The sense/feeling dynamic Sight:/Joy\Worry – clarity. Hearing aligns with the feeling of grief. Touch/Sex aligns with anger. The sense of smell affixed to fear. And the sense of taste joins with both satisfaction and the feelings of awe. While Daoism develops the consciousness of the fives souls or spirits.

The heart is classified as a Yang organ, the center of emotional and mental activities; while the kidneys are considered a Yin organ, regulating water metabolism, growth, and reproduction. These two opposing organs hold the Shen (Spirit), associated with joy, consciousness, and emotional well-being. In TCM the Shen/spirit particularly significant in understanding mental and emotional health. The Shen spirit associated with the heart and considered the most refined and spiritual aspect of the soul. It represents consciousness, awareness, and the essence of one’s being. The Shen spirit encompasses mental clarity, perception, and the ability to think and reflect. It is responsible for cognitive functions and self-awareness. The Shen spirit serves as the bridge between the physical body and the spiritual realm, influencing one’s spiritual beliefs and practices. A harmonious Shen is essential for overall health and well-being. Imbalances or disturbances in Shen can lead to mental health issues such as anxiety, depression, insomnia, and other emotional disturbances.

The kidneys (Yin) and heart (Yang) form a significant Yin-Yang relationship in TCM, and together they house two of the five TCM souls: Zhi (Will) and Shen (Spirit). This relationship emphasizes the interplay between the physical and spiritual aspects of a person. Zhi represents willpower, determination, and the ability to make decisions. It is associated with motivation and the drive to achieve goals. A strong Zhi supports resilience and perseverance, while a weak Zhi can lead to fear, indecisiveness, or a lack of direction.

Kidneys (Yin): Represent the foundation of life, vitality, and willpower. They store essence and influence growth and development. Heart (Yang): Governs the spirit, consciousness, and emotional well-being. It is the center of mental activity and emotional expression. The balance between the kidneys and heart is crucial for overall health. A harmonious relationship between Zhi and Shen supports emotional stability, mental clarity, and the ability to pursue one’s goals effectively. Imbalances in either aspect can lead to emotional disturbances, lack of motivation, or difficulties in decision-making. In summary, the Kidney/Heart Yin-Yang relationship houses two of the five TCM souls—Zhi (Will) and Shen (Spirit)—highlighting the interconnectedness of physical vitality and emotional well-being in TCM philosophy.

The couple liver/gallbladder contain the Hun (Ethereal Soul). The Hun, associated with the liver gallbladder bi-polar battery, and considered of a more spiritual (ethereal) quality, compared to the Po corporeal Soul. It is linked to the mind, consciousness, and higher mental functions. The Hun soul governs dreams, creativity, and the imagination. It plays a crucial role in one’s ability to envision and aspire; associated with emotional health, particularly in terms of joy, inspiration, and the ability to connect with others on a deeper level; influencing a person’s sense of purpose and ones’ destiny in life. This soul contributes to mental clarity, emotional stability, and a sense of peace. Imbalances can lead to issues such as anxiety, depression, or a lack of direction.

The Po is considered the more physical and material aspect of the soul. It is associated with the body’s vitality, instincts, and sensory experiences. The Po also closely linked to the lungs, which are responsible for respiration and the intake of Qi (vital energy). The lungs play a role in the body’s ability to process emotions and maintain a sense of physical well-being. The large intestine, associated with the elimination of waste and the processing of nutrients akin to the gallbladder. It complements the lungs like the gallbladder assists the liver, in the context of the body’s overall function and health.

The Po governs the physical body and its functions, including “instincts”, bodily sensations, and the basic survival gut feelings. The Po, more connected to physicality, it influences emotional responses, particularly those related to fear and grief. A balanced Po contributes to physical health, vitality, a sense of grounding. Imbalances can lead to issues such as respiratory problems, digestive issues, and emotional disturbances like sadness or fear.

The Po, as a Yin aspect, complements the Yang aspects of the soul, such as the Shen and Hun; essential for understanding the physical and instinctual gut feeling internal suggestions-aspects of a person’s body/mind. Its connections to the lungs and large intestine highlighting the interplay between physical health and emotional well-being.

The spleen/stomach house the Yi (Intellect). Yi is related to thought processes, memory, and the ability to concentrate. It governs analytical thinking and the ability to process information. A balanced Yi supports clear thinking and good memory, while an imbalanced Yi can lead to overthinking, worry, or difficulty focusing. The Yi plays crucial roles in digestion and the transformation of food into Qi (vital energy) and blood.

The Yi represents the intellectual and cognitive functions of the mind. It is closely related to thought processes, memory, concentration, and the ability to analyze and process information. The spleen and stomach are the organs associated with Yi. The spleen is responsible for the transformation and transportation of nutrients, while the stomach is involved in the initial digestion of food. A healthy spleen and stomach are essential for nourishing the mind and supporting cognitive functions.

Yi governs analytical thinking, reasoning, and the ability to understand and interpret information. It is essential for problem-solving and decision-making. The Yi is also linked to memory retention and recall, influencing how well a person can remember and utilize information. A well-functioning Yi supports the ability to focus and concentrate on tasks, enhancing productivity and learning. A balanced Yi contributes to clear thinking, good memory, and effective cognitive functioning. It allows for a calm and focused mind, facilitating learning and comprehension. An imbalanced Yi can lead to issues such as overthinking, excessive worry, difficulty concentrating, and mental fatigue. It may also manifest as digestive problems, as the health of the spleen and stomach directly impacts cognitive functions.

The Yi plays a vital role in mental clarity and emotional stability. Maintaining balance in the Yi is essential for overall well-being, as it influences not only cognitive functions but also emotional health and the ability to cope with stress. The Yi (Intellect) is a crucial aspect of the soul associated with the spleen and stomach, governing thought processes, memory, and concentration. A balanced Yi supports clear thinking and effective cognitive functioning, while imbalances can lead to mental and emotional challenges.

As Western medicine views the idea of TCM meridians as a form of witchcraft so too Western medicine divorces the brain which houses the Mind as completely divorced from the internal organs of the physical body. Hence Zen Buddhism’s “mindfulness, more closely related to Western medical practices than Daoism and Japanese and Chinese healing.

In TCM, meridians are believed to be pathways through which Qi (vital energy) flows. These pathways connect various organs and systems in the body, facilitating communication and balance. The health of the body is seen as a result of the harmonious flow of Qi through these meridians. TCM emphasizes the interconnectedness of the mind and body. The organs are not viewed in isolation; rather, they are part of a holistic system where emotional and mental states can influence physical health. For example, the liver is associated with anger, while the heart is linked to joy.

Western medicine often views concepts like meridians as lacking empirical evidence and may categorize them as pseudoscience or “witchcraft.” This skepticism arises from a reliance on scientific methods and measurable outcomes, which do not easily accommodate the more abstract concepts found in TCM. Traditionally, Western medicine has tended to separate the mind from the body, focusing on biological and physiological processes. The brain is often viewed as the center of cognitive functions, while the organs are seen as separate entities with specific physical roles. This separation can lead to a more mechanistic understanding of health, where mental and emotional factors are not always integrated into treatment.

Mindfulness practices, often associated with Zen Buddhism, emphasize awareness and presence in the moment. These practices have gained popularity in Western contexts, particularly in psychology and stress reduction. Mindfulness encourages individuals to observe their thoughts and feelings without judgment, fostering a greater connection between mind and body. Mindfulness has been integrated into various Western medical practices, particularly in mental health treatment, such as Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction (MBSR) and cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT). This integration reflects a growing recognition of the importance of mental and emotional well-being in overall health.




The UN Defamation Case

Britain proves itself a faithless whore once again. Like as its White Paper betrayal of the 1917 Balfour Declaration upon which the League of Nations awarded to Britain the Palestine Mandate of 1922.

Recently the UN Security Council attempted to decree a Chapter VII ultimatum which dictated that Israel surrender to Hamas in Gaza. The British and French betrayal of Israel in this UN vote would have meant that those countries would have committed to going to war, like as happened following the Chapter VII UN ultimatum issued to North Korea in the early 50’s.

Should Israel abandon its partnership with the UN European voting block and request to join the American voting block of nations? Currently Israel has a special relationship with the EU and participates in various EU programs and agreements. It is part of the European Neighbourhood Policy and has signed agreements that allow for cooperation in areas such as trade, research, and cultural exchange. The EU member states typically coordinate their positions and voting strategies within the UN framework as part of this broader Western bloc. Clearly, in this latest UN Chapter VII ultimatum which demanded that Israel immediately surrender to Hamas or the UN would invade Israel like it did North Korea, this betrayal by Britain and France places them within the Russian Chinese UN voting block of nations.

Aligning more closely with the U.S. voting block could strengthen Israel’s ties with the United States, which has historically been one of its strongest allies. This could lead to increased political and military support. Abandoning the EU partnership could limit Israel’s diplomatic options and reduce its influence in Europe, a 3rd rate power among the community of nations today. The geopolitical landscape is constantly changing, and Israel may need to navigate its relationships with both the EU and the U.S. carefully to maintain its interests. Ultimately, the decision to shift alliances or voting blocks would depend on a variety of factors, including Israel’s strategic goals, the current geopolitical climate, and the potential benefits and drawbacks of such a move. It would require careful consideration of both immediate and long-term implications for Israel’s security and diplomatic standing.

The EU is one of Israel’s largest trading partners. A shift away from the EU could have economic repercussions, impacting trade relations and access to European markets. As global power dynamics shift, Israel’s foreign policy may need to adapt to new realities, including emerging alliances and changing attitudes within the international community. Israel’s decision-making regarding its alliances and voting blocks will likely involve weighing immediate benefits against long-term strategic goals. The interplay between its relationships with the U.S. and the EU will be crucial in shaping its future diplomatic and security landscape. Careful consideration of both current geopolitical trends and historical ties will be essential for Israel to navigate this complex environment effectively.

As countries like China and India gain influence, Israel may need to consider how these shifts affect its relationships with both the U.S. and the EU. Engaging with these emerging powers could open new avenues for trade and diplomacy. Israel’s relationships with neighboring countries and regional powers are also evolving. The Abraham Accords, for example, have opened new diplomatic channels with Arab states, which could influence Israel’s strategic calculations. Israel’s leadership will need to articulate a clear long-term vision for its foreign policy that considers both immediate security concerns and broader economic and diplomatic goals.

The normalization agreements with several Arab states have significantly altered the geopolitical landscape in the Middle East. These accords not only enhance Israel’s security but also create opportunities for economic collaboration and cultural exchange. But the critical Plate tectonics earthquake of the Abraham Accords it destroyed the British French UN 242 two-state solution as the only viable option for peace in the Middle East.

The Abraham Accords have shifted the focus away from the Palestinian issue as a central concern for many Arab states, which may complicate efforts to revive the two-state solution. The normalization agreements suggest that some Arab nations are willing to engage with Israel independently of progress on Palestinian statehood. The Oct 7th abomination has permanently changed the dynamics in the region. The archaic British and French chapter VI UN Ultimatum for a two-state solution, completely out dated and irrelevant.

The changing realities on the ground, including shifting alliances and the evolving nature of conflicts, necessitate a reassessment of how peace can be achieved. As the dynamics change, there may be a need for innovative diplomatic strategies that address the complexities of the situation. Specifically, Arab Palestinian leadership has clearly proven itself as utterly bankrupt to merit becoming an independent nation among the community of nations in the UN Middle East voting block.

Italy did not support the recent UN Security Council resolution that called for an immediate and permanent ceasefire in Gaza, which was vetoed by the United States. The resolution received 14 votes in favor, with the U.S. casting the only vote against it. The draft resolution was co-sponsored by several countries, but Italy was not listed among those actively supporting the resolution in the context of the recent vote.

These 14 countries Russia, China, France, United Kingdom, Algeria (co-sponsor), Denmark (co-sponsor), Greece (co-sponsor), Guyana (co-sponsor), Pakistan (co-sponsor), Panama (co-sponsor), South Korea (co-sponsor), Sierra Leone (co-sponsor), Slovenia (co-sponsor), and Somalia (co-sponsor) voted to impose a UN Chapter VII dictate upon Israel. Of these countries Algeria and other scamp countries do not even have diplomatic relations with Israel.

Neither Iran nor Sudan, for example, have diplomatic relations with Israel. No different than Algeria. Algeria and Turkey have developed a military partnership and cooperation over the years, particularly in the areas of defense and security. This relationship has been strengthened through various agreements and joint military exercises. The relationship is part of a broader strategic partnership that includes economic and political cooperation, with both hostile countries to Israel sharing interests in regional stability and security.

Those 14 countries have already repeatedly called for international condemnation of Israel, rabidly support Palestinian terrorism relabeled as “Palestinian rights”. They already engage in public relations propaganda campaigns hostile to Israel. They already support and initiate legal actions against Israel in international courts such as the ICC. These countries have escalated their rhetoric propaganda against Israel. Hamas could never have dug its complex tunnel system without international support. They already promote cultural and academic boycotts of Israel.

These countries throw their support for the Palestinian cause, like whores on street corners sell their wares. They often use ‘stinky’, blood libel slander rhetoric, to condemn Israeli actions, framing them as oppressive or colonial. Such putrid rhetoric seeks to poison public opinion and mobilize support for Palestinian groups. Numerous solidarity movements around the world that advocate for Palestinian rights; they often align with groups like Hamas, viewing them as legitimate representatives of Palestinian resistance.

Countries without diplomatic relations with Israel compare to corrupt judges that accepts bribes. This objection, seeks to raise critically important questions about the legitimacy and fairness of the recent Chapter VII UN ultimatum which demanded that Israel surrender to Hamas in Gaza. While the analogy of a corrupt judge highlights concerns about bias and fairness, the international system, in point of fact, operates on principles of representation and sovereignty.

The International system operates, so it appears, as something akin to a beauty contest. What defines beauty — not a rational logical concept. Israel demands a change to the International system. It could express its rebuke of the UN, by leaving the UN. The analogy of a corrupt judge suggests that countries without diplomatic relations with Israel, that they lack objective credibility to fairly judge the case heard before the court of international opinion.

This perception of bias, Israel argues, undermines the legitimacy of all UN resolutions or demands made against Israel. Particularly since nations who do not have diplomatic relations with Israel obvious their anti-Israel hostility – politically motivated – rather than based on objective criteria. Chapter VII of the UN Charter allows the Security Council to take action to maintain or restore international peace and security. However, the application of this chapter, like as in the Korean war, especially when it appears to favor one side over another in a conflict, historically expands the local conflict into a far larger international war. The call for Israel to surrender to Hamas, obviously viewed by both the US and Israel as an ultimatum that lacks balance and fairness. Just as China despised the UN Chapter VII ultimatum decreed against North Korea.

The international UN system, indeed based on principles of state sovereignty and representation. However, the effectiveness and fairness of this system both the US and Israel have repeatedly warned and challenged. Especially when certain countries dominate decision-making processes or when resolutions reflect geopolitical interests rather than universal principles of justice.

The idea that Israel should demand changes to the international UN system, this demand reflects the Israeli requirements for a more equitable and fair approach to international relations expressed through public UN diplomacy organs. Leaving the UN perhaps a radical step. But it raises questions about the effectiveness of the international UN system of public diplomacy among nation states in the world community of nations.

Britain proves itself a faithless whore once again. Like as its White Paper betrayal of the 1917 Balfour Declaration upon which the League of Nations awarded to Britian the Palestine Mandate of 1922.

Recently the UN Security Council attempted to decree a Chapter VII ultimatum which dictated that Israel surrender to Hamas in Gaza. The British and French betrayal of Israel in this UN vote would have meant that those countries would have committed to going to war, like as happened following the Chapter VII UN ultimatum issued to North Korea in the early 50’s.

Should Israel abandon its partnership with the UN European voting block and request to join the American voting block of nations? Currently Israel has a special relationship with the EU and participates in various EU programs and agreements. It is part of the European Neighbourhood Policy and has signed agreements that allow for cooperation in areas such as trade, research, and cultural exchange. The EU member states typically coordinate their positions and voting strategies within the UN framework as part of this broader Western bloc. Clearly, in this latest UN Chapter VII ultimatum which demanded that Israel immediately surrender to Hamas or the UN would invade Israel like it did North Korea, this betrayal by Britain and France places them within the Russian Chinese UN voting block of nations.

Aligning more closely with the U.S. voting block could strengthen Israel’s ties with the United States, which has historically been one of its strongest allies. This could lead to increased political and military support. Abandoning the EU partnership could limit Israel’s diplomatic options and reduce its influence in Europe, a 3rd rate power among the community of nations today. The geopolitical landscape is constantly changing, and Israel may need to navigate its relationships with both the EU and the U.S. carefully to maintain its interests. Ultimately, the decision to shift alliances or voting blocks would depend on a variety of factors, including Israel’s strategic goals, the current geopolitical climate, and the potential benefits and drawbacks of such a move. It would require careful consideration of both immediate and long-term implications for Israel’s security and diplomatic standing.

The EU is one of Israel’s largest trading partners. A shift away from the EU could have economic repercussions, impacting trade relations and access to European markets. As global power dynamics shift, Israel’s foreign policy may need to adapt to new realities, including emerging alliances and changing attitudes within the international community. Israel’s decision-making regarding its alliances and voting blocks will likely involve weighing immediate benefits against long-term strategic goals. The interplay between its relationships with the U.S. and the EU will be crucial in shaping its future diplomatic and security landscape. Careful consideration of both current geopolitical trends and historical ties will be essential for Israel to navigate this complex environment effectively.

As countries like China and India gain influence, Israel may need to consider how these shifts affect its relationships with both the U.S. and the EU. Engaging with these emerging powers could open new avenues for trade and diplomacy. Israel’s relationships with neighboring countries and regional powers are also evolving. The Abraham Accords, for example, have opened new diplomatic channels with Arab states, which could influence Israel’s strategic calculations. Israel’s leadership will need to articulate a clear long-term vision for its foreign policy that considers both immediate security concerns and broader economic and diplomatic goals.

The normalization agreements with several Arab states have significantly altered the geopolitical landscape in the Middle East. These accords not only enhance Israel’s security but also create opportunities for economic collaboration and cultural exchange. But the critical Plate tectonics earthquake of the Abraham Accords it destroyed the British French UN 242 two-state solution as the only viable option for peace in the Middle East.

The Abraham Accords have shifted the focus away from the Palestinian issue as a central concern for many Arab states, which may complicate efforts to revive the two-state solution. The normalization agreements suggest that some Arab nations are willing to engage with Israel independently of progress on Palestinian statehood. The Oct 7th abomination has permanently changed the dynamics in the region. The archaic British and French chapter VI UN Ultimatum for a two-state solution, completely out dated and irrelevant.

The changing realities on the ground, including shifting alliances and the evolving nature of conflicts, necessitate a reassessment of how peace can be achieved. As the dynamics change, there may be a need for innovative diplomatic strategies that address the complexities of the situation. Specifically, Arab Palestinian leadership has clearly proven itself as utterly bankrupt to merit becoming an independent nation among the community of nations in the UN Middle East voting block.

Italy did not support the recent UN Security Council resolution that called for an immediate and permanent ceasefire in Gaza, which was vetoed by the United States. The resolution received 14 votes in favor, with the U.S. casting the only vote against it. The draft resolution was co-sponsored by several countries, but Italy was not listed among those actively supporting the resolution in the context of the recent vote.

These 14 countries Russia, China, France, United Kingdom, Algeria (co-sponsor), Denmark (co-sponsor), Greece (co-sponsor), Guyana (co-sponsor), Pakistan (co-sponsor), Panama (co-sponsor), South Korea (co-sponsor), Sierra Leone (co-sponsor), Slovenia (co-sponsor), and Somalia (co-sponsor) voted to impose a UN Chapter VII dictate upon Israel. Of these countries Algeria and other scamp countries do not even have diplomatic relations with Israel.

Neither Iran nor Sudan, for example, have diplomatic relations with Israel. No different than Algeria. Algeria and Turkey have developed a military partnership and cooperation over the years, particularly in the areas of defense and security. This relationship has been strengthened through various agreements and joint military exercises. The relationship is part of a broader strategic partnership that includes economic and political cooperation, with both hostile countries to Israel sharing interests in regional stability and security.

Those 14 countries have already repeatedly called for international condemnation of Israel, rabidly support Palestinian terrorism relabeled as “Palestinian rights”. They already engage in public relations propaganda campaigns hostile to Israel. They already support and initiate legal actions against Israel in international courts such as the ICC. These countries have escalated their rhetoric propaganda against Israel. Hamas could never have dug its complex tunnel system without international support. They already promote cultural and academic boycotts of Israel.

These countries throw their support for the Palestinian cause, like whores on street corners sell their wares. They often use ‘stinky’, blood libel slander rhetoric, to condemn Israeli actions, framing them as oppressive or colonial. Such putrid rhetoric seeks to poison public opinion and mobilize support for Palestinian groups. Numerous solidarity movements around the world that advocate for Palestinian rights; they often align with groups like Hamas, viewing them as legitimate representatives of Palestinian resistance.

Countries without diplomatic relations with Israel compare to corrupt judges that accepts bribes. This objection, seeks to raise critically important questions about the legitimacy and fairness of the recent Chapter VII UN ultimatum which demanded that Israel surrender to Hamas in Gaza. While the analogy of a corrupt judge highlights concerns about bias and fairness, the international system, in point of fact, operates on principles of representation and sovereignty.

The International system operates, so it appears, as something akin to a beauty contest. What defines beauty — not a rational logical concept. Israel demands a change to the International system. It could express its rebuke of the UN, by leaving the UN. The analogy of a corrupt judge suggests that countries without diplomatic relations with Israel, that they lack objective credibility to fairly judge the case heard before the court of international opinion.

This perception of bias, Israel argues, undermines the legitimacy of all UN resolutions or demands made against Israel. Particularly since nations who do not have diplomatic relations with Israel obvious their anti-Israel hostility – politically motivated – rather than based on objective criteria. Chapter VII of the UN Charter allows the Security Council to take action to maintain or restore international peace and security. However, the application of this chapter, like as in the Korean war, especially when it appears to favor one side over another in a conflict, historically expands the local conflict into a far larger international war. The call for Israel to surrender to Hamas, obviously viewed by both the US and Israel as an ultimatum that lacks balance and fairness. Just as China despised the UN Chapter VII ultimatum decreed against North Korea.

The international UN system, indeed based on principles of state sovereignty and representation. However, the effectiveness and fairness of this system both the US and Israel have repeatedly warned and challenged. Especially when certain countries dominate decision-making processes or when resolutions reflect geopolitical interests rather than universal principles of justice.

The idea that Israel should demand changes to the international UN system, this demand reflects the Israeli requirements for a more equitable and fair approach to international relations expressed through public UN diplomacy organs. Leaving the UN perhaps a radical step. But it raises questions about the effectiveness of the international UN system of public diplomacy among nation states in the world community of nations.

Recently the UN Security Council attempted to decree a Chapter VII ultimatum which dictated that Israel surrender to Hamas in Gaza.

Italy did not support the recent UN Security Council resolution that called for an immediate and permanent ceasefire in Gaza, which was vetoed by the United States. The resolution received 14 votes in favor, with the U.S. casting the only vote against it. The draft resolution was co-sponsored by several countries, but Italy was not listed among those actively supporting the resolution in the context of the recent vote.

These 14 countries Russia, China, France, United Kingdom, Algeria (co-sponsor), Denmark (co-sponsor), Greece (co-sponsor), Guyana (co-sponsor), Pakistan (co-sponsor), Panama (co-sponsor), South Korea (co-sponsor), Sierra Leone (co-sponsor), Slovenia (co-sponsor), and Somalia (co-sponsor) voted to impose a UN Chapter VII dictate upon Israel. Of these countries Algeria and other scamps countries do not even have diplomatic relations with Israel.

Neither Iran nor Sudan have diplomatic relations with Israel. No different than Algeria. Algeria and Turkey have developed a military partnership and cooperation over the years, particularly in the areas of defense and security. This relationship has been strengthened through various agreements and joint military exercises. The relationship is part of a broader strategic partnership that includes economic and political cooperation, with both countries sharing interests in regional stability and security.

Those 14 countries have already repeatedly called for international condemnation of Israel, rabidly support Palestinian terrorism relabeled as “Palestinian rights”. They already engage in public relations propaganda campaigns hostile to Israel. They already support and initiate legal actions against Israel in international courts such as the ICC. These countries have escalated their rhetoric propaganda against Israel. Hamas could never have dug its complex tunnel system without international support. They already promote cultural and academic boycotts of Israel.

These countries throw their support for the Palestinian cause, like whores on street corners sell their wares. They often use stinky rhetoric, to condemn Israeli actions, framing them as oppressive or colonial. Such putrid rhetoric seeks to poison public opinion and mobilize support for Palestinian groups. Numerous solidarity movements around the world that advocate for Palestinian rights; they often align with groups like Hamas, viewing them as legitimate representatives of Palestinian resistance.

Countries without diplomatic relations with Israel compare to corrupt judges that accepts bribes. This objection, seeks to raise critically important questions about the legitimacy and fairness of the recent Chapter VII UN ultimatum which demanded that Israel surrender to Hamas in Gaza. While the analogy of a corrupt judge highlights concerns about bias and fairness, the international system, in point of fact, operates on principles of representation and sovereignty.

The International system operates, so it appears, as something akin to a beauty contest. What defines beauty — not a rational logical concept. Israel demands a change to the International system. It could express its rebuke of the UN, by leaving the UN. The analogy of a corrupt judge suggests that countries without diplomatic relations with Israel, that they lack objective credibility to fairly judge the case heard before the court of international opinion.

This perception of bias, Israel argues, undermines the legitimacy of all UN resolutions or demands made against Israel. Particularly since nations who do not have diplomatic relations with Israel obvious their anti-Israel hostility – politically motivated – rather than based on objective criteria. Chapter VII of the UN Charter allows the Security Council to take action to maintain or restore international peace and security. However, the application of this chapter, like as in the Korean war, especially when it appears to favor one side over another in a conflict, historically expands the local conflict into a far larger international war. The call for Israel to surrender to Hamas, obviously viewed by both the US and Israel as an ultimatum that lacks balance and fairness. Just as China despised the UN Chapter VII ultimatum decreed against North Korea.

The international UN system, indeed based on principles of state sovereignty and representation. However, the effectiveness and fairness of this system both the US and Israel have repeatedly warned and challenged. Especially when certain countries dominate decision-making processes or when resolutions reflect geopolitical interests rather than universal principles of justice.

The idea that Israel should demand changes to the international UN system, this demand reflects the Israeli requirements for a more equitable and fair approach to international relations expressed through public UN diplomacy organs. Leaving the UN perhaps a radical step. But it raises questions about the effectiveness of the international UN system of public diplomacy among nation states in the world community of nations.

The concerns about bias and fairness in the international UN system, particularly regarding Israel, absolutely valid and reflect broader issues of representation and legitimacy. Whether through reforming the UN or reconsidering its participation, Israel’s approach to these challenges will significantly impact its international standing and relationships. The debate over the effectiveness and fairness of the current international system remains a fixed constant, critical issue in global politics.

A Brief History of the PLO

The Front de Libération Nationale (FLN) was a pivotal political and military organization in Algeria, instrumental in the country’s struggle for independence from French colonial rule. Founded on November 1, 1954, the FLN emerged from a coalition of various nationalist groups in response to growing discontent among Algerians regarding colonial oppression. Its primary aim was to unify the Algerian independence movement.

The FLN initiated an armed struggle against French colonial forces, employing guerrilla warfare tactics to mobilize the Algerian population. The conflict escalated into a brutal war characterized by widespread violence, including massacres, torture, and repression by French forces.

During the Battle of Algiers (1957) the French military and police employed widespread torture tactics. Torture methods used included electric shocks, waterboarding, beatings, rape, and psychological torture; much like as did the American soldiers did during its military occupation of Iraq. Both Paris and Washington officially denied institutionalized torture till irrefutable evidence forced both governments to admit to war crimes.

General Paul Aussaresses later testified that France used torture systematically. These abhorrent crimes included, arrest without trial of thousands of Algerians. Often executed and secretly buried or dumped into mass graves. Disappearances were especially rampant in Algiers and rural counter-insurgency zones. French soldiers/police burned Villages, effect forced mass population transfers.

The Philippeville massacre of 1955 stands out in the sheer horror of its brutality. French forces and colonial militias killed over 10,000 civilians, vastly disproportionate to the initial FLN attack. 10 years prior the Setif and Guelma massacre of May 1945, the French murdered 45,000 Algerians following nationalist protests.

Over 2 million Algerians forcibly relocated into “regroupement camps” (strategic hamlets), to isolate FLN from civilian support. Poor sanitation, hunger, and exposure led to high mortality among Algerian refugee populations. French forces used napalm and aerial bombardment in mountain regions (Kabylie, Aurès). French forces likewise targeted FLN zones but inflicted mass civilian casualties. French settlers (pieds-noirs) were often armed and formed irregular militias that committed atrocities against Muslim civilians with impunity.

The United Nations response to French war crimes in Algeria was slow, cautious, and heavily constrained by Cold War politics and Western bloc interests, particularly France’s veto power and influence in global diplomacy. The UN did not directly intervene or impose sanctions, but Algeria’s plight increasingly gained attention through General Assembly debates and resolutions—largely driven by non-aligned and newly decolonized nations.

When the Algerian War of Independence began in 1954, France portrayed it as an internal matter, claiming Algeria was not a colony but an integral part of the French Republic. Western powers, especially the U.S. and U.K., deferred to France’s framing, prioritizing Cold War alliance unity (NATO) over human rights concerns. The UN Charter does not allow intervention in matters deemed “essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state” (Article 2.7), which France used to shield itself from scrutiny.

As evidence of torture, massacres, and repression mounted, newly independent nations (especially from Africa and Asia) began pressing the issue in the UN General Assembly. The FLN’s diplomatic campaign, supported by countries like Egypt, India, and Yugoslavia, began to shift international opinion. 1956–1957: Tunisia and Morocco, recently decolonized, raised the Algerian question in the UN. This caused major diplomatic tension with France.

UN Resolution 1208 (XII) – 1957 recognized the existence of the Algerian question as a legitimate international issue, not merely an internal French matter. And called for a peaceful solution through negotiation. France rejected the resolution outright. UN Resolution 1573 (XV) – 1960 expressed concern about the continuation of the conflict. Reaffirmed the right of Algerian people to self-determination. By this time global support for Algerian independence increased mounting pressure upon Paris.

This model basically duplicates all Arab Israeli wars which frame Israel as the colonial occupying power. France was a permanent member of the UN Security Council, and while the issue was mostly debated in the General Assembly, France successfully blocked binding Security Council action. France boycotted several General Assembly sessions where the Algerian question was discussed. French diplomats attacked the legitimacy of the UN discussing Algeria, viewing it as a violation of national sovereignty.

Following the Evian Accords and independence in July 1962, Algeria was admitted to the UN on October 8, 1962. Algeria quickly became an outspoken voice in the Non-Aligned Movement, a supporter of Third World liberation movements (including the PLO, ANC, and SWAPO), and a leading critic of colonialism and Western imperialism.

While France dismissed the UN’s involvement, the international moral and diplomatic pressure contributed to France’s eventual decision to negotiate with the FLN.

The FLN garnered support from diverse segments of Algerian society, including urban workers and rural peasants. Additionally, the organization sought international recognition and support, gaining sympathy from other anti-colonial movements and countries, and establishing diplomatic relations with nations like Egypt and the Soviet Union.

The collapse of the post Oslo PA the result of complex deeply fractured historical grievances, Fatah-Hamas rivalry, economic conditions, and corruption and incompetence by PA authorities. An estimated 60,000+ Gaza residents were on the PA payroll (pre-2017), including teachers, health workers, and security personnel. Though many have lost faith in the PA’s political strength, they remain economically tied to Ramallah. Fatah-affiliated clans and networks still ideologically support the PA over Hamas, despite repression. Some of these sectors see the PA as less oppressive and more internationally legitimate than Hamas.

Professionals, merchants, and private sector actors who depend on international aid, investment, and cross-border coordination with the PA West Bank often favor PA-led stability. They tend to oppose Hamas’s isolationist policies and its conflict-driven economy. This group desires economic integration and the PA’s international legitimacy (especially post-Oslo) as beneficial.

Educated, secular, and urban populations in Gaza, especially those involved in NGOs, media, or cultural production, tend to reject Hamas’s theocratic governance. While they do not necessarily love the PA, they see it as a potential path to diplomatic solutions or political reform. This group is small and largely suppressed under Hamas rule.

Hamas and Islamic Jihad supporters view the PA as corrupt collaborator Uncle Toms. The equivalent of post WWII Kapo liberal/Reform g’lut assimilated and intermarried Jews. They see the PA only as a “quisling authority” that legitimizes Israeli occupation under the guise of diplomacy.

Many young Palestinians in Gaza (born post-1995) see no gains from the PA’s diplomacy or state-building. No independent state. No elections. No unity. They often view the PA and Hamas as two corrupt, self-serving regimes—with contempt for Ramallah’s aging leadership, especially Abbas (seen as autocratic and out-of-touch).

Gaza’s densely populated refugee camps, where living conditions are most dire, are angriest at all leadership. The PA is perceived as having abandoned Gaza after the 2007 Hamas takeover. Punishing Gaza economically via PA salary cuts and utility restrictions (as in 2017). Many residents of Jabalia, Nuseirat, Khan Younis, and Rafah camps despise both Hamas and the PA, but feel most betrayed by the PA for its perceived alliance with Israel and abandonment of resistance.

These fringe but growing groups reject both the PA and Hamas as nationalist or insufficiently Islamic. They view the PA as a Western puppet and call for a global Islamic caliphate. Some defected to ISIS affiliates in Sinai or to extremist factions in Syria.

Many ordinary families, especially those caught between allegiances or burned out by endless factionalism, see both Hamas and the PA as irrelevant or harmful. Some may resent the PA for failing to achieve unity, while others blame Hamas for repressing dissent and provoking wars.

Palestinian populations in UNRWA refugee camps in Lebanon and Syria are among the most politically radicalized and marginalized segments of the Palestinian diaspora. Their views on the Palestinian Authority (PA) are shaped by decades of abandonment, repression, and factional infighting. Overall, support for the PA is extremely low, and many despise or view it as illegitimate—especially those in Lebanon, where conditions are especially dire.

Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and other Islamist factions have a strong grassroots presence in refugee camps administered by the UNWRA. Hostile Movements include, the Ain al-Hilweh, Rashidieh, and Burj al-Barajneh (Lebanon); and the Yarmouk, Khan al-Shih, and Daraa (Syria, pre-war).

These factions view the PA as corrupt, collaborative with Israel, and traitorous to the armed struggle. Accuse the PA of betraying the right of return through Oslo and later negotiations. Position themselves as the true representatives of resistance and dignity.

Camp Youth and Stateless Palestinians often stateless, with no civil rights in Lebanon or Syria, they continually face extreme poverty, segregation, and lack of mobility. They blame the PA for abandoning them, failing to demand their rights internationally. Many romanticize armed resistance (especially Hamas or secular militias) and loathe the Ramallah elite. In Lebanon, where Palestinians are barred from 30+ professions and denied property rights, resentment toward the PA is fierce and generational.

Secular Leftist Factions like the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) and Democratic Front (DFLP) have active branches in Lebanon and Syria camps. They strongly oppose the PA’s peace process, Oslo Accords, and coordination with Israel. They likewise view Abbas as a sellout to imperialism and Zionism and strongly advocate for armed revolution and full return to pre-1948 Palestine, like as described by the original PLO Charter.

Nonaligned Camp Residents, this rather large portion of camp residents feel utterly disillusioned with all Palestinian factions. They perceive the PA, Hamas, and others as both Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dumb, corrupt, internally divided and more focused on power struggles than liberation. These residents may speak bitterly of the PA’s detachment from diaspora realities, especially since the PA governs only parts of the West Bank and has done little for Palestinians outside historic Palestine.

The PA, virtually absent on the ground in Lebanon and Syria—unlike in the West Bank or Gaza. PA embassies in Beirut or Damascus are viewed as diplomatic shells with no grassroots authority. Internecine violence between Fatah-aligned forces and Islamist groups in camps like Ain al-Hilweh have further discredited the PA as a stabilizing force.

The PA is viewed by most Palestinians in Lebanon and Syria as either irrelevant or complicit in their marginalization, with support largely confined to vestigial Fatah networks or aid-dependent figures. For the vast majority, the PA is a failed authority that represents neither justice nor national aspirations.

The French regroupement camps constitute as a forced displacement policy affecting over 2 million Algerians, deliberately uprooted from their villages and herded into militarized “strategic hamlets” under appalling humanitarian conditions—often without sanitation, food, or basic infrastructure. This was an explicit counterinsurgency strategy to sever the FLN from rural civilian support. There has been no systematic forced population transfer akin to re-groupe-ment camps. Palestinians in Area C still live in their own homes, often in longstanding rural villages. Hamas employs its civilian populations, hospitals, schools, and UN buildings as operational military sites. Therefore the French-Algerian war’s scorched-earth relocations and camp internments bear no serious resemblance to the Oslo-era administrative complexity of Area C or even present day Gaza.

The FLN’s struggle against colonialism resonated with the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), which was established in 1964, shortly after Algeria achieved independence. Both movements aimed to liberate their territories from foreign domination. The PLO adopted similar strategies in its armed struggle against Israel, particularly during the late 1960s and 1970s. The FLN’s efforts to gain international recognition influenced the PLO’s diplomatic approach, as the latter sought to establish itself as the legitimate representative of the Palestinian people on the global stage, which culminated in the Oslo Accords wherein Israel recognized the PLO as the sole representative of the Palestinian People. In 2006 Hamas stamped “The Lie” upon the Oslo Accords and in 2007 it both murdered and expelled PA representatives from Gaza.

The FLN provided training and support to Palestinian fighters, significantly shaping the military capabilities of the PLO. This collaboration highlighted the interconnectedness of anti-colonial struggles in the Arab world. Additionally, Yasser Arafat, the leader of the PLO, drew inspiration from Ho Chi Minh’s “People’s War” strategies, which had proven successful in expelling both French and American imperialists.

Bodies of two Israeli hostages recovered in Gaza

J-Wire: The bodies of Gadi Hagai and his wife, Judy Weinstein Hagai were returned to Israel last night in a military operation, 607 days after they were kidnapped and murdered by Hamas terrorists, Kibbutz Nir Oz announced on Thursday morning.

“We are grateful to see them brought home for a proper burial in Israel. We thank the IDF and all who worked tirelessly for over a year and a half to bring them back. Yet our hearts remain incomplete until all 12 hostages from Nir Oz — and all 56 hostages still held — return home,” Kibbutz Nir Oz said.

According to the Israel Defense Forces, the bodies were recovered in Khan Yunis. The army added that they were killed during the October 7 attacks and the bodies held by the Al Mujahideen Battalions, the same terror group that kidnapped the Bibas family.

Gadi Hagai was 72 at the time of his murder. The kibbutz described him as “A sharp man, a gifted wind instrument player since the age of three, connected to the land, a chef and a follower of a healthy vegan diet and sports.”

His wife Judy, 70, was an English teacher who specialized in children with special needs and attention and concentration problems. The kibbutz said she treated children with anxiety due to the stresses of life in the Gaza border community. The kibbutz remembered her as a “Poet, entrepreneur, loves to create and is dedicated to working for peace and brotherhood.”

They are survived by four children and seven grandchildren.

At least 1,180 people were killed, and 252 Israelis and foreigners were taken hostage in Hamas’s attacks on Israeli communities near the Gaza border on October 7. Of the 56 remaining hostages, 33 are believed to be dead.

Visit J-Wire’s main page for all the latest breaking news, gossip and what’s on in your community.

…