Tundratabloids.com has taken some time off to analyze the OpEd by Norwegian Tel Aviv embassy’s number two (tongue in cheek…), Mr. Dysvik recently published. I think Mr. Dysvik needs to count his teeth after such a brutal kick….
lifted from tundratabloids.com
NORWEGIAN EMBASSY ‘NUMBER TWO’ IN TEL AVIV DEEMS ISRAELI SETTLEMENTS AS ‘BOTHERSOME’ ……..
For Norway’s political elite, a Jew building a home in Judea or Samaria, is an impediment to peace, but Palestinian Arab terrorism can never be allowed to stop the peace process.
NOTE: Vebjørn Dysvik has a history of lashing out against Israel.
When the actual facts surrounding the League of Nations/United Nations mandate for close settlement of Judea & Samaria by the Jews are spelled out, it becomes amazingly clear that they have a solid, impenetrable case, for settling the so called ‘West Bank’. For more, click here.
International law expert Professor Eugene V. Rostow, examining the claim for Arab Palestinian self-determination on the basis of law, concluded:
“… the mandate implicitly denies Arab claims to national political rights in the area in favor of the Jews; the mandated territory was in effect reserved to the Jewish people for their self-determination and political development, in acknowledgment of the historic connection of the Jewish people to the land. Lord Curzon, who was then the British Foreign Minister, made this reading of the mandate explicit. There remains simply the theory that the Arab inhabitants of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip have an inherent ‘natural law’ claim to the area. Neither customary international law nor the United Nations Charter acknowledges that every group of people claiming to be a nation has the right to a state of its own.”26 [italics by author]
In the wake of the 67′ War, the language of UNSCR 242 clearly underlines the legality of the Jewish presence within the Disputed Territories, by stating that Israel will withdraw from territories (meaning not from all of them) after reaching through negotiations a peace agreement with the warring Arab parties. For more, click here.
(i) Withdrawal of Israel armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict;8
What also makes this unmistakably clear, is the chapter under which UNSCR 242 purposefully falls under, a chapter six type resolution, not a chapter seven, as in the case of UNSCR 1435 concerning Saddam Hussein’s Iraq occupation of Kuwait. That was an illegal occupation, the Israeli presence inside Judea and Samaria, is not. For more on that, click here.
UN Security Council Resolution 242 from November 1967 is a Chapter VI resolution which, when taken together with Resolution 338, leads to an Israeli withdrawal from territories (not all the territories) that Israel entered in the 1967 Six-Day War, by means of a negotiated settlement between Israel and its Arab neighbors. The resolution is not self-enforced by Israel alone; it requires a negotiating process.
Fast forward to the present day. Just because a career bureaucrat/political hack from Norway commits his mouth to uttering ignorant verbiage about the legality of Jews living within the Disputed Territories, it doesn’t give automatic credibility to the words spoken, especially when the points contained have the consistency of helium.
Vebjørn Dysvik, Norway’s ‘number two’ at its embassy in Israel, is a goofball. Lets put aside for the moment of Israel’s legal right to be in Judea and Samaria, and look at it from another angle. When will Dysvik write about Hamas promoting genocide and Norway failing to meet its commitment under the UN genocide convention to take Hamas to an international court?.
As a Norwegian diplomat he serves a country which according to conservative politician Peter Gitman finances indirectly Palestinian terrorists including mass murderers. As a representative of that nation he meets many Israelies. Their family members, friends or acquaintances have been murdered by people who Dysvik’s country finances.
This shows just how intellectually dishonest the man is, as well as the government he represents. Norway as a political entity (I have no problem with individual Norwegians, other than they keep voting the bums back in, but that’s presently a Western problem in general) cannot be trusted to utter anything that’s short of extremism.
They (the Norwegian political entity) can’t be trusted with anything remotely related to the ‘peace process’ where the Arabs’ war against the Jews is concerned, for they are not impartial, and definitely not moderates, having long since chosen to represent Hamas’ views and talking points.