ICJ Ruling on Israel – Impact on Palestinians & Muslims

There is a question here. The question says, How do we read the decision taken by the ICJ yesterday? Yes. Brothers and sisters, I'm sure that many of you have read so many comments about the decision that was taken by the ICJ yesterday regarding the case that was raised by South Africa against the occupation or the against the Zionist stake. See, in order to understand the decision, you have to read it, according to the context, not read it in an abstracted way. Because if you read it in that

way, you might miss understand it and you might have, you might come up with the wrong conclusion. What do I mean by that? There are a number of contextual situations that we need to take into consideration when we want to interpret that decision and understand it. First of all, it is the first time that is real, or the occupation, or design is the state was taken into this court. And it was the first time for the Zionist state to stand up against another country in the court. It is the

first time South Africa or any other country have taken or held Israel accountable for what they do that in of itself, my dear brothers and sisters is a precedent. And that in of itself, is is a victory. Because see, none of us none of us before this, before this happened, were imagining that Israel in one time will be held accountable for what it used to do or what it did.

As we know that it's about it violated, I don't remember the exact number of the UN resolutions. And the US always in support is in support of Israel eel and supported this about eel against the UN decisions against many UN

resolutions, etc. So that was in of itself is a precedent. This is one thing. The other thing is brothers and sisters.

Sometimes we expect something and then we judge what we hear according to our expectations, but sometimes our expectations are not realistic, they are

too high, they are sometimes driven by some emotions. So we need to take that into consideration. Is that are our expectations real? Or are they just emotional or not realistic.

Also, my dear brothers and sisters, when we read this, we need to understand the language of the the legal language, the language of the international community, the international law, I know that so many people don't like the word even international law because they said that the international law is unjust, the international law is supporting Israel and as a supporting America is the international law is written in fact in order to support the oppressors and the international law is

written in order to to secure the interests of the super powers who who built the international law who who established the UN the five, the five countries that have the veto right, etc, etc. But at the end of the day, the international law we like it, we don't like it, it is the law that governs all of us,

this is a reality. So under international law, we should not have this transparency that it is it has no element of justice it has it is just always against Islam and Muslims etc. will let us not think of that otherwise, we will

you know, we will act and behave as victims.

And this mentality for me, yeah, to victimize yourself and to act as a victim all the time. This is a huge

The problem yes brothers sisters. Yeah, many Muslims, they like to act like this. And I warn you brothers and sisters don't behave, don't act don't think like victims. And you know,

if you look at the seal of the prophets of Allah, the Quran,

Sharif, Islam, Islam is against this against thinking as a victim. Islam is against having a victim mentality because those who act as victims, they will never think properly, okay? And they will internalize they will victimize themselves, they will internalize that, and this is not an OMA that is leading other nations. We are the leaders of the entire humanity, going from high raw material or collegiate leanness down maroon every roofie what and how gnarly.

You are the best nation ever raised to mankind in joining the good and forbidding the evil cave aged Almighty Misha Hido. Today in epic Allah, Allah Insha Allah, Allah Allah called as the OMA waka Delica, Jana como matawa, Saba, etc, etc. We are not just any nation, we don't accept to be victimized and we should not we should not think as victims now, and you know, that

even when the Companions came to the Prophet Sal, Allahu Allah who it was, and we will sell them in Makkah, and they said, look at us, how they torture us how they do this and that against us. The Prophet salallahu Alaihe Salam did not sympathize with this language of oppression.

So brothers, please, whenever you read what is happening in the world don't don't read it as the Companions

as the Companions, or some of the companions, hubub and other companions have used it before the Prophet sallallahu sallam, what did the Prophet sallallahu Sallam say to them, the prophesy seven did not sympathize with what they said.

Because sympathizing with what they said, it means that the Prophet SAW Selim accepts this victim mentality from them, and he's not treating them as the leaders of their entire humanity. So the Prophet sallahu wa sallam showed them the vision, showed them the future, showed them he had a very positive message, he changed the mentality the way they think, and this is how we should read anything that that takes place. Now, so.

So, so I was saying that, see, we should not interpret anything from that perspective. I wanted and I was saying that yes, many of us, they dislike the international law, they hate maybe the international law, etc. That doesn't mean that we, that we we reject it as the umbrella that is governing all of us because you like it, you don't like it, it is the umbrella that is governing all of us.

Also, my dear brothers and sisters, the last point about how to read it.

We don't understand that language, the legal language. And that's why, again, we miss interpret so many things. And we expect a legal body like the International Court of Justice, to use our language, but they have their own sensitivities, their own calculations, etc. For example, they avoided using ceasefire. Okay, but

they said that that is it has to stop killing and all actions that are leading to killing and destruction. What does that mean? Okay, maybe not ceasefire, because there might be some legal political issues around the word ceasefire. But that ceasefire, as South Africa said, that, as the legal team of South or the representative of the legal team of South Africa have said that this cannot be achieved unless you accept the ceasefire or

Okay,

so this is one thing, what does it mean to say that they have to stop all actions that lead to destruction, not only killing, but the killing and destruction. So this in of itself is a victory. The other. So this is number one, number two, that they have to allow human humanitarian aid to sufficient, as far as I remember the word they word they use sufficient humanitarian aid to enter Lhasa. Okay. The third point, which is really a crucial point, okay, that they have to report to iCj

within a month, which is

Israel is always this Zionist state is seen always above the the, the international law. Yeah, they don't care. No one has ever said to them, you have to report to me, okay. Nobody has ever told them that you have to report to me in in a month time. Okay. So these are the three key elements of the decision. But also there might be some other subtle, you know, messages, which is that the decision, especially in the beginning, if you have heard it, I heard part of it, okay, live, because it was

just read before Yamaha. And I heard the other part later it was recorded the

the president of the court, she was reading the statements of South Africa, that includes the statements of the occupation,

that are horrible statements of the occupation. And the court have accepted that the Palestinians are to be protected by international law, and they are subject to

they are subject to protection, but also on the other side, that they the suffering of the Palestinians have been taken into consideration. So they use the same language South Africa has used, which indicates that the court in general is in favor, not just in favor is ruling in favor of the of South Africa.

And the Palestinians. Of course, we need to remember also that, you know, how does it work as I understood and as everyone has said, that these are interim or temporary measures, and until the final decision of the ICJ will be taken, which will take maybe years. Okay, so these temporary or interim, temporary decisions are crucial. And what I say is that these decisions will pave the way towards maybe other decisions in other institutions. That's why Algeria just announced that they

will, they ask for the EU and afford the Security Council to meet in order to see what can be done for those decisions to be implemented by the occupation.

And other countries can also take this, this this decision as a foundation for many other maybe legal actions against the occupation. So brothers and sisters, I think it is very positive, and we need to capitalize on it, we need to use it as a foundation for maybe other other legal actions against the occupation. And not only that, even from the civil society, I think, here in the UK, the Palestinian action group or maybe the Palestinian activist, activist, they can use this as a

foundation to to force our government to stop selling equipment.

You know, weapons to Israel, not just only weapons but even equipment as they say quote, unquote, for surveillance for sub

court etcetera, they can do this, because they can say that this can be used for the work can lead to a genocide by the way. See, the court did not do not what is or met the possibility of genocide. They did not commit to that. They said they put it in a phrase that it might lead to a genocide. Even as we said the word ceasefire, maybe they did not use it, but they used instead of it all actions that lead to killing and destructions, which is, as South Africa representative said that

cannot happen unless there is a ceasefire. Yeah, maybe I think one of them, he said, We are disappointed that they did not use the word ceasefire, but this what it leads to? Okay. So these are some of the comments. And I said, this should be utilized and used on all levels here, locally, and maybe internationally. Let me say something, why don't we try to send aid to HERSA? Because this will go along with the international law and with the decision of the ICJ and if Israel, it stops us

or stops any now. This is let me play. Yeah, to Erdogan, if anyone can send this to Earthdawn? Yeah, please do. So I will try to communicate with some of the officials that are you know, from the the, okay, from the Turkish government, that this is the best time for Turkey, and maybe Malaysia, maybe some other countries and Tunisia, maybe even South Africa. Yeah, South Africa, anyone, I will try to communicate with some people that maybe South Africa can send now aid to Gaza under this decision.

And if the occupation stops them, then they have

been exposed before the entire world that they don't implement any they don't implement the international law, they will be exposed more and more. And maybe they cannot do that. They cannot to stop that. And imagine, imagine, this is a plea to maybe too many countries, not just one country, if South Africa started if, for example, Turkey coordinated with South Africa, with Malaysia, with Algeria. Okay, maybe with this pain, Belgium, because its payment Belgium really have

really have good distances towards what is happening. And maybe we try here from the UK, I think it's about it cannot stop all these ships that will pass aid to HERSA. And forget about the Egyptian regime. They are not going to cooperate. They are not going to cooperate, unfortunately. But let us do whatever we can do in order to send humanitarian aid to us. Yeah, we ask Allah Allah Allah to help our brothers and sisters in HERSA. And don't forget that this will be like a moral support for

the people of Gaza. And this This helps them a lot