Recognition of "Palestine" subverts international law

"Palestine" and international law

Cascading declarations of recognition by a majority of existing states have no legal bearing on the creation of a state. These declarations directly undermine the authority of law-based international relations.

Israel erased from mapfrom Palestine-net.com

Though 157 UN member states have now recognized a "State of Palestine,” their actions do not confer legal sovereignty. Under international law, statehood is “independent of recognition by the other states.”

Juridical statehood is based on four explicit treaty requirements:

(a) a permanent population;

(b) a defined territory;

(c) a government; and

(d) the capacity to enter into relations with other states.

These requirements are codified at the Convention on the Rights and Duties of States (Montevideo Convention; 1933).

Regarding the specific interests of Israel, recognizing a Palestinian Arab state contradicts both the Oslo Accords and the Arafat-Rabin agreements not to alter legal status of pertinent territories prior to formal accession by Jerusalem. On its face, any such wrongful recognition is simultaneously at odds with (1) EU obligations incurred as organizational witness to the Oslo Accords; and (2) endorsements of these Accords as expressed in assorted UN resolutions.

For the security record, the existing State of Israel is less than half the size of America’s Lake Michigan.

There is more. Multiplying recognitions of “Palestine” pay no attention to the Jewish State’s lack of strategic depth and its continuous exposure to exterminatory enemies. Ironically, these acts of recognition prejudge the outcome of negotiations that were never completed precisely because of unrelenting Palestinian Arab terrorism.

Inter alia, such acts openly ignore the Natural Law origins of international law. Recalling William Blackstone's Commentaries (Book IV, "Of Pubic Wrongs," Chapter V): "All law results from those principles of natural justice in which all the learned of every nation agree...."

All declared recognitions of “Palestine” fail to meet even a single one of the Montevideo Convention requirements. Whatever their motives, national governments that support sovereignty for “Palestine” are welcoming a self-declared aggressor state[1] into the community of nations. As evidenced by unhidden Palestinian intentions, this terror-state[2] would become an existential hazard for Israel, directly or in collaboration with other irredentist states. Ipso facto, it would also undermine international law more generally.

In world politics, law is indispensable.[3] Accordingly, even as leaders of a “nonmember observer state,”[4] Palestinian leaders of every ideological stripe have displayed persistently “criminal intent” (mens rea) toward Israel. But could this lawless behavior be reduced or controlled in a Palestinian state? And what if the new Arab sovereignty were “demilitarized?”[5]

There is a clear and conspicuous answer to this question: A fully sovereign state of “Palestine” could evade any pre-independence security promises made to Israel, including those made in alleged good-faith.[6] Because treaties are binding only on states, any agreement between a non-state Palestinian authority and a sovereign State of Israel would have no foreseeable effectiveness.[7] This is the case even if a “government of Palestine” were somehow willing to consider itself bound by its pre-state assurances.

There is much more to consider. Even in such presumptively favorable circumstances, the "government of Palestine" could retain law-based grounds for agreement termination. For example, it could withdraw from the pact on account of a supposed “material breach.” In all likelihood, such withdrawal would stem from a supposed violation by Israel that had “undermined the object and/or purpose of the agreement.”[8]

Multiple opportunities for Palestinian Arab manipulation would arise. Palestinian Arab decision-makers could point toward what international law calls a "fundamental change of circumstances" (rebus sic stantibus). If a falsely-called "Palestinian" state were to declare itself vulnerable to previously unforeseen dangers, perhaps even to forces of other Arab armies or jihadist insurgencies, it could lawfully end its commitment to remain demilitarized. A faux "state of Palestine" could also point to “errors of fact” or “duress” as allegedly permissible grounds for agreement termination.

On its face, any treaty or treaty-like agreement is void if, at the time of entry into force, it conflicts with a "peremptory" rule of general international law - a “jus cogens” rule accepted and recognized by the international community of states as one from which "no derogation is permitted.” Because the right of sovereign states to maintain military forces essential to self-defense is precisely such a rule, “Palestine” could credibly argue its right to abrogate any arrangements that had “forced its demilitarization.”

In the 18th century, Thomas Jefferson, an American president, wrote knowledgably about obligation and international law.[9] While affirming that "Compacts between nation and nation are obligatory upon them by the same moral law which obliges individuals to observe their compacts...," he simultaneously declared "There are circumstances which sometimes excuse the nonperformance of contracts between man and man; so are there also between nation and nation." Specifically, Jefferson continued, if performance of contractual obligation becomes "self-destructive" to a party, "...the law of self-preservation overrules the law of obligation to others."

Conceivably, a presumptive "Palestinian state" could “lawfully” abrogate any pre-independence commitments to Israel to demilitarize.

Nonetheless, cascading declarations of recognition by a majority of existing states have no legal bearing on the creation of such a state. These declarations directly undermine the authority of law-based international relations.

In response to a growing number of ill-conceived declarations, Jerusalem will need to assess the existential threat of Palestinian statehood as part of a larger strategic whole - in tandem with the intersecting perils of conventional and unconventional war. This points to a comprehensive analytic focus on potential synergies between enemy state aggressions[10] and Israel’s nuclear doctrine.[11] Already, recent victories over Iran, Hamas and Hezbollah notwithstanding, Israeli leaders need to plan variously incremental shifts from “deliberate nuclear ambiguity” to “selective nuclear disclosure.” Though all recent declarations of national support for Palestinian statehood ignore authoritative international law, even a faux “State of Palestine” would be intolerable.

International law is not a suicide pact.[12] Israel has no legal obligation to carve a new enemy state aggressor from its own still-living body. Despite their expression in tones of high moral authority, the accumulating recognitions of “Palestine” avoid much larger justice issues altogether.

Assigning formal statehood to violence-centered entities that seek an existing state’s elimination violates both justice and logic. In the case of Israel and the Palestinian Arabs, such assignment is wrongheaded on several levels and signals an evident contradiction in terms. Instead of accepting ad hoc policy prescriptions drawn from non-legal sources, the community of states needs to display “good faith” (a basic expectation of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties) by upholding law-based rules.

Under the British Mandate, in confirmation of decisions made at the San Remo peace conference of April 1920, all of Palestine was reserved for establishment of a “Jewish national home.”

In 1922, though no part of mandatory Palestine had ever been designated for the creation of another Arab state, Britain illegally carved Transjordan out of 78% of its mandatory territory. Transjordan became Jordan in 1949, just one year after declaration of the State of Israel. On May 15, 1948, one day after the State of Israel was declared by David Ben-Gurion ion Tel-Aviv, Azzam Pasha, Secretary General of the Arab League, forecast the war being planned by combined Arab forces: “This will be a war of extermination and a momentous massacre.”

The later UN partition resolution (1947) included only 22% of the lands originally pledged to establish a Jewish national home. In the interests of a peaceful start, Jewish national authorities accepted the lawlessly reduced land mass (essentially half of the residual one-fifth) in exchange for establishing a Jewish state.

There is one final observation. In view of continuing misinformation alleging Israeli displacement of a pre-existing Arab state, all current issues concerning "Palestinian statehood" and disposition of Gaza should be understood in correct historical context:

At no time in history has there been a Palestinian state.

If current UN member states want to establish the first Palestinian state, they will first have to honor the listed expectations of both Montevideo (1933) and Vienna (1969) conventions.

Sources:

[1] Punishment of aggression is a longstanding expectation of international criminal law. The peremptory principle of Nullum Crimen sine poena, "No crime without a punishment," has its origins in the Code of Hammurabi (c. 1728 - 1686 B.C.E.); the Laws of Eshnunna (c. 2000 B.C.E.); the even-earlier Code of Ur-Nammu (c. 2100 B.C.E.) and the law of exact retaliation, or Lex Talionis, presented in three separate passages of Torah.

[2] Under international law, all terror actors and actions are criminal per se. Terrorist movements are always hostes humani generis, or "common enemies of mankind." See: Research in International Law: Draft Convention on Jurisdiction with Respect to Crime, 29 AM J. INT'L L. (Supp. 1935) 435, 566 (quoting King V. Marsh (1615), 3 Bulstr. 27, 81 Eng. Rep 23 (1615) ("a pirate est hostes humani generis")).

[3] The origins of modern international law lie in the Peace of Westphalia (1648), the agreement that ended the Thirty Years’ War. See: Treaty of Peace of Munster, Oct. 1648, 1 Consol. T.S. 271; and Treaty of Peace of Osnabruck, Oct. 1648, 1., Consol. T.S. 119. Together, these two treaties comprise the Peace of Westphalia.

[4] This status was conferred by UN General Assembly resolution in 2012. It offers “Palestine” certain rights of deliberation in pertinent UN organs, but no corresponding voting rights.

[5] For earlier assessments of this question see: Louis René Beres and (Ambassador) Zalman Shoval, "Why a Demilitarized Palestinian State Would Not Remain Demilitarized: A View Under International Law," Temple International and Comparative Law Journal, Winter 1998, pp. 347-363; and Louis René Beres and Ambassador Shoval, "On Demilitarizing a Palestinian `Entity' and the Golan Heights: An International Law Perspective," Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law, Vo. 28., No.5., November 1995, pp. 959-972. Zalman Shoval was twice Israel’s ambassador to the United States.

[6] Under international law, issues of “good faith” fall under the principle of pacta sunt servanda: “Every treaty in force is binding upon the parties to it and must be performed by them in good faith.” See Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, May 23, 1969, art. 26, 1155 U.N.T.S. 344; reprinted in 8 I.L.M. 679 (1969).

[7] Regarding relevant obligations of a sub-state Palestinian Authority, Israel should remain wary about all such asymmetrical legal agreements. In this connection, several well-known U.S. federal court decisions affirm that legal agreements between sub-state and state parties may sometime impose unequal compliance expectations. In the prominent case of Tel-Oren v. Libyan Arab Republic, a 1981 civil suit in U.S. federal court wherein the plaintiffs were Israeli survivors and representatives of persons murdered in a terrorist bus attack in Israel in 1978, Circuit Judge Harry T. Edwards opined: "...I do not believe the law of nations imposes the same responsibility or liability on non-state actors, such as the PLO, as it does on states and persons acting under color of state law."

[8] See Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (1969).

[9] From the beginning, even from the time of the American Revolution, international law has been part of US domestic law. In exact words used by the U.S. Supreme Court in The Paquete Habana, "International law is part of our law, and must be ascertained by the courts of justice of appropriate jurisdiction, as often as questions of right depending upon it are duly presented for their determination. For this purpose, where there is no treaty, and no controlling executive or legislative act or judicial decision, resort must be had to the customs and usages of civilized nations." See The Paquete Habana, 175 U.S. 677, 678-79 (1900). See also: The Lola, 175 U.S. 677 (1900); Tel-Oren v. Libyan Arab Republic, 726 F. 2d 774, 781, 788 (D.C. Cir. 1984) (per curiam) (Edwards, J. concurring) (dismissing the action, but making several references to domestic jurisdiction over extraterritorial offenses), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1003 (1985) ("concept of extraordinary judicial jurisdiction over acts in violation of significant

[10]For the crime of aggression under international law, see: Resolution on the Definition of Aggression, adopted by the UN General Assembly, Dec. 14, 1974. U.N.G.A. Res. 3314 (XXIX), 29 UN GAOR, Supp. (No. 31), 142, UN Doc A/9631 (1975) reprinted in 13 I.L.M., 710 (1974).

[11] Regarding the prospective impact of Israeli nuclear doctrine on United States security, see monograph (Israel/Tel Aviv University) by Professor Louis René Beres, postscript by General (USA/ret.) Barry R. McCaffrey

https://sectech.tau.ac.il/sites/sectech.tau.ac.il/files/PalmBeachBook.pdf

[12] Though international law may allow certain imperiled states a resort to carefully measured preemptions, an act of “preemptive” self-defense (or “anticipatory self-defense) is never the same as one of “preventive” self-defense. Preemption is a military strategy of striking an enemy first in the expectation that the only alternative is to be struck first oneself. A preemptive attack is launched by a state that believes enemy forces are about to attack. A preventive attack is launched not out of genuine concern for "imminent" hostilities, but rather for fear of longer-term deterioration in a particular military balance. In a preemptive attack, the length of time by which the enemy's action is anticipated is very short, while in a preventive strike the interval is considerably longer. A problem for Israel, in this regard, is not only the practical difficulty of determining “imminence,” but also that delaying a defensive strike could prove fatal.

Author: Louis Beres, Prof. Emeritus in International Law at Purdue

Muslim Gangsters Hiring Young Blonde Swedish Girls as Assassins

Sweden's teenage girl assassins: How ruthless mobsters are recruiting young blondes to kill and maim rivals in bomb attacks in gang-ravaged Swedish cities

Swedish criminal gangs are enlisting teenage girls to carry out brutal killings and maim rivals in  bomb attacks in gang-ravaged Swedish cities.

Girls as young as 15 are recruited on social media as child soldiers and given cash to complete killings before spending the blood money on clothes and handbags.

The nordic nation, once considered a haven of low crime, has been gripped by extreme gang violence in recent years and has one of Europe's worst gun crime rates with frequent gangland shootings and bombings. 

Children have been used by gangs to commit crimes on an unprecedented scale, with the country this month moving to reduce the age of criminal responsibility to 13.

But while many have typically been male, vulnerable and from impoverished or migrant backgrounds, mobsters are now seeking out young girls. 

The attackers, known as 'Green Women', are increasingly 'young, blonde, typical' Swedish girls, and are thought to attract less suspicion when carrying out or aiding savage attacks.    

They are promised quick cash, with bounties of up to £13,000 offered for a successful hit. Less risky tasks, including mixing napalm to help with assassinations, can also fetch thousands. 

Once signed up, the young recruits carry out the gang bosses' dirty work, assassinating relatives of rival gangsters and other targets, often without ever meeting the person who is ordering the killing.

One girl, Olivia, was caught on CCTV and later handed a one-year prison sentence for aiding and abetting arson

Many are keen to demonstrate they are more ruthless than their male counterparts. 

One girl, Olivia, was caught on CCTV casually delivering bags containing an explosive nicknamed 'napalm' after being hired to build and deliver a firebomb for an arson attack on a rival gang.

The 17-year-old was approached by a gang 'handler' on social media who offered her money and told her she must help with the petrol bomb attack 'today'.

She then went to buy petrol, petrol cans and further ingredients to assemble the Molotov-style firebomb, Swedish investigators said.

After combining the ingredients she handed them over to a pair of male gangsters.

She was later found to have texted her boyfriend to say the handover 'went ok'.

He texted her back a link to a news story about the resulting attack accompanied by a Swedish slang term, translating as 'wild' or 'cool'. 

The teenager was handed a one-year prison sentence for aiding and abetting arson.

Lisa dos Santos, a Swedish prosecutor, told the Telegraph: 'They [the gangs] call them Green Ladies, green as in newbies, because the police initially didn't look at them in the same way as the men.

Pictured: A teenager armed with an AK-47 spraying bullets into the home of a terrified mother and her young child in a Stockholm suburb in 2023

'The police are now aware that girls are taking part but I think it's still easier for them to fly under the radar.'

Evin Cetin, a youth crime expert and lawyer, said the recruitment of young girls was a 'strategic plan' by gangs because 'the Swedish system, the police, would never think to stop a blonde Swedish girl'.

'Girls are often identified as victims ... but their participation in criminal circles is much more widespread than what we have long assumed,' Sweden's Justice Minister Gunnar Strömmer said in April.  

'I had a case involving a 15-year-old girl recruited to shoot someone in the head,' Stockholm prosecutor Ida Arnell said. 

'She was able to choose the type of mission she wanted, in other words, to aim at the guy's door or his head. She chose the head.'

Olivia was one of 280 girls aged between 15 to 17 who were charged with murder, manslaughter or other violent offences last year.

It is unclear how many were linked to organized crime but Swedish investigators claim the numbers may be much higher as many are not prosecuted.

Children have been seen as ideal targets for gangs because until this month those under 15 would not be held criminally responsible for their actions.

The country eventually lowered the age of criminal responsibility to 13 after a surge in under-15s suspected of murder, aiding and abetting murder or attempted murder. 

In the first six months of 2024, there were 93 cases, three times the same period the year before. 

But the number of gang-related shootings and murders decreased as a whole in 2024 and are slowing again this year. 

The increase in girls suspected of serious gang crimes caused a diplomatic row with Hungary after Sweden accused Viktor Orban of attempting to 'dismantle' the rule of law.

The nordic nation, once considered a haven of low crime and safety, has been gripped by extreme gang violence in recent years

'The Swedish government lectures us about the rule of law. Meanwhile, according to an article by Die Welt, criminal networks are exploiting Swedish children as killers, knowing the system won’t convict,' the Hungarian prime minister said.

While the use of young girls by mobsters has shocked Sweden, the country has long been overrun by a 'gig economy of gang violence'. 

Children travelling across the country to commit the crimes for cash is becoming 'the new normal', Erik Lindblad, head of the police's gang violence taskforce, warned last year. 

He said online chat groups were advertising jobs to 'tens of thousands' of young members, inviting them to volunteer to carry out a hit. 

One recent case saw police arrest a 16-year-old after a fatal triple shooting at a barber shop in the city of Uppsala in April.

Three young men, aged between 15 and 20, were shot in the head in what was believed to be a gang related murder. 

One of the people who died in the attack was reportedly known to police, as he was involved in the investigation of a planned attack on a relative of local gang leader Ismail Abdo.

Abdo, whose nickname is 'The Strawberry', is a well-known figure in Uppsala's gangland.

His mother was murdered in her home in the city in 2023, which sparked a dark and violent chapter in gang violence in the country.

Earlier in April, two people were killed in a suspected gang fight in Gothenburg, while a famous hip-hop artist was shot dead in a gang battle in the city in December. 

And last month, one person was shot dead with another injured in a reported gang-related shooting near a mosque in the city of Orebro.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-15144049/Swedens-teenage-girl-assassins.html

George Galloway Detained by Counter-Terrorism Police

George Galloway and wife stopped by counter-terrorism police after landing at Gatwick airport

The former MP George Galloway and his wife have been detained by counter-terrorism police at Gatwick airport.

The 71-year-old was stopped by officers after flying in to London from Moscow, via Abu Dhabi.

Workers Party of Britain (Communists), of which Mr Galloway is the leader, said the move was 'politically motivated intimidation', claiming police have refused to reveal any information.

In a statement shared on X, they said: 'At 11am we were informed by police officers in Gatwick that our party leader George Galloway and his wife have been detained at the airport.

The former MP George Galloway and his wife have been detained by counter-terrorism police at Gatwick airport

Mr Galloway and his wife Putri Gayatri Pertiwi had been stopped under schedule 3 of the Counter Terrorism and Border Security Act 2019. The couple pictured with their daughter

Mr Galloway and his wife Putri Gayatri Pertiwi, 40, had been stopped under schedule 3 of the Counter Terrorism and Border Security Act 2019.

The Act gives police, immigration and customs officers the power to stop people to find out if they are 'engaged in hostile activities that threaten national security or the economic wellbeing of the UK'. 

A Met spokesman said: 'We can confirm that on Saturday, counter-terrorism officers at Gatwick airport stopped a man in his 70s and a woman in her 40s under schedule 3 of the Counter Terrorism and Border Security Act 2019.

'Neither of them were arrested and they were allowed on their way.'

The couple were eventually let go without charge.

The hard-left Party went on to condemn 'the attempt to intimidate political opponents of the drive towards war with Russia and China'.

Galloway made an appearance in Moscow as Russia's Vladimir Putin celebrated Victory Day with a huge military parade in May.

Galloway made an appearance in Moscow as Russia's Vladimir Putin celebrated Victory Day with a huge military parade in May. Mr Galloway posted a series of snaps alongside his wife on Moscow's Red Square. Putrid is fashionably dressed in best Communist & Pally style.

Taking to X to share snaps of himself in Moscow, Galloway called the Victory Day Celebrations 'moving, emotional, inspiring, humbling.' 

Pictures posted by the politician show him and his fourth wife - who is 30 years his junior - posing for the camera on Red Square. 

Galloway received the Haniyeh Award for his support of Hamas terrorists. Having previously praised the assassinated Hamas leader as a 'martyr,' Galloway said in a speech he was 'honoured' to receive the award, and also bragged about having Haniyeh's passport in his possession.

'I actually hold in my safe the passport because when we arrived with one of our convoys to break the siege on Gaza [in 2009], he had promised me a Palestinian passport but they had run out of Palestinian passports. 

'So he gave me his own personal passport and it is one of my most treasured possessions,' the British politician boasted.

He went on to thank Iran for 'their steadfastness in support for the Palestinian people.'

'The truth is when Palestine is finally free, Iran will be able to take its place in the panoply of heroes who made it possible.'

Scandal has followed Mr Galloway throughout his career, as he lost his Rochdale seat at last year's general election just months after winning the constituency in a shock by-election.

While in 2019 he was sacked by TalkRADIO after being accused of 'blatant anti-Semitism' in a tweet about the Spurs' defeat in the Champions League final. 

The Workers Party of Britain leader has previously represented seats in Glasgow, east London and Bradford in the Commons, for Labour and later the Respect Party. 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-15140429/George-Galloway-wife-arrested-counter-terrorism-police-Gatwick-airport.html

George Galloway tonight launched into an extraordinary rant after he and his wife were detained by counter-terror police for nine hours at Gatwick Airport. 

The angered former MP, 71, claimed armed police swooped on him and Putri Gayatri Pertiwi, 40, on Saturday. 

The couple had returned to the UK from Moscow via Abu Dhabi.

Mr Galloway said he was quizzed for four hours and asked about his views on Russia and China. 

His wife was questioned for five hours in which she was asked about 'her famous fingernail, painted in the Palestinian colours'.

In a slew of unfounded accusations at the start of his Mother Of All Talk Shows broadcast, the leader of the Workers Party of Britain claimed they were detained under the terrorism act 'to gain access to our communications'. 

He defiantly launched into a scathing diatribe against counter terrorism officers.

George Galloway, 71, with his wife Putrid Gayatri Pertiwi, 40, in 2024 speaks to the media outside the Houses of Parliament in Westminster after being sworn in as a MP 

His 4th wife Putrid was asked about her 'her famous fingernail, painted in the Palestinian colours'

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-15142701/george-galloway-gatwick-airport-detained.html

George Galloway attended Putin's Victory Day celebrations alongside his wife 

Galloway called the parade in Russia 'emotional' and 'inspiring'

Galloway in Tehran to receive an award in honour of Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh, who was killed in an Israeli strike in the Iranian capital

He was given the Martyr Ismail Haniyeh award at a media festival held in Tehran in recognition of his 'outspoken defence of Palestine.'

Having previously praised the assassinated Hamas leader as a 'martyr,' Galloway said in a speech said he was 'honoured' to receive the award.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14697567/Former-MP-George-Galloway-appears-Moscow-Putins-Victory-Day-celebrations-days-collecting-award-names-Hamas-fighter-Tehran.html

Cousin Marriages in Pakistan

I've seen for myself just how ruinous this practice can be, writes KHADIJA KHAN on cousin marriages

Hundreds of children across Britain are living as best they can with crippling neurological syndromes, unable to move without a wheelchair, let alone play football or any of the other sports their peers take for granted.

Or they live with blindness, deafness, learning problems or the routine failure of their lungs, livers, hearts or kidneys – their painfully shortened lives spent in and out of hospitals. 

Their genetic conditions are so rare that they are nameless, and confound the best consultants in the world. More yet are stillborn.

And it is maddening to think that their young lives needn’t have been ruined in this way. 

For these children are the offspring of cousin marriages, a sham tradition that is prevalent in Pakistani communities.

There, I’ve said it – this is a cultural problem. This does not arise from women smoking or drinking during pregnancy. Nor does this have anything to do with their age. 

Every tragedy described above comes about through a practice that is driven by deeply religious beliefs and alarmingly high levels of illiteracy – something that NHS England’s Genomics Education Programme seems blithely relaxed about.

Having grown up in Pakistan, where an astonishing 65 per cent of marriages are between blood relatives – or consanguineous – I have witnessed how ruinous the practice can be.

The practice, which is common in the British Pakistani community, has been linked to a greater prevalence of disorders such as cystic fibrosis or sickle cell disease

This map, by Professor Alan Bittles an Australian expert in genomics, shows rates of consanguineous marriage, that between cousins, around the world

Of course, it can be disastrous for the baby but also ostracising for the mother dare she criticise cousin marriages.

My aunt did so, fearing for the health of her future children. 

She courageously sought to break free from the cycle of cousin marriages and was told she was no longer part of the family. 

On the few occasions she was invited to functions, it was as a guest rather than as the eldest daughter. 

But her single-mindedness beat a path for my mother to follow.

However, this was a generation ago. Now, in Pakistan discussion of the biological concerns over cousin marriage is common, at least in the more enlightened cities. 

So why on earth is an NHS body drawing a veil of silence over the issue here?

The Genomics Education Programme would seemingly rather it be swept under the carpet with the implicit warning that any discussion of cousin marriage is culturally insensitive, which only emboldens those in Muslim communities who use it as a means of controlling women.

 

The practice perpetuates a misogynistic culture – the extreme manifestation of which is honour killings, so it not to be excused or indulged, as this NHS body seems intent on doing.

Least of all on the risible pretext that if it happened 500 years ago, then it continues to have a place in modern Britain. In seeking to remove the stigma around cousin marriages, the Genomics Education Programme points out that laws permitting the practice ‘date back to the reign of Henry VIII’. 

With two executed wives to his name, the Tudor king is hardly a poster boy for women’s rights.

But as the grooming gangs scandal has shown us, the safety of young girls – and now the future health of babies – can easily be sacrificed on the altar of political correctness.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-15140545/ruinous-practice-KHADIJA-KHAN-cousin-marriages.html

Fury after woke NHS supports first-cousin marriages despite risk of birth defects - and oppression against women

The NHS has been  'taking the knee' to political correctness by advocating the benefits of marriages between cousins – despite it carrying an increased risk of birth defects and being used as a way to oppress women.

The guidance says that it has been allowed in Britain since Henry VIII passed a law enabling him to marry Anne Boleyn's cousin Catherine Howard.

The practice, which is common in the British Pakistani community, has been linked to a greater prevalence of disorders such as cystic fibrosis or sickle cell disease.

Figures show that up to 20 per cent of the children treated for congenital problems in cities such as Sheffield, Glasgow and Birmingham are of Pakistani descent, compared with 4 per cent or lower in the wider population – and treating these problems costs the NHS billions.

First-cousin marriage is linked to an increased likelihood of a child having a genetic condition or a congenital anomaly.

The practice, which is common in the British Pakistani community, has been linked to a greater prevalence of disorders such as cystic fibrosis or sickle cell disease 

Children of first cousins have an increased chance of being born with a genetic condition, of about 4-6 per cent. 

Tory MP Richard Holden said that the Conservatives would legislate to ban marriage between first cousins on the grounds that it 'destroys integration, women's rights and the health of those involved'.

Mr Holden told The Mail on Sunday: 'Our NHS should stop taking the knee to damaging and oppressive cultural practices.

The Conservatives also want to see an end to cousin marriage as it is a back door to immigration fraud, but Labour are deaf to these sensible demands. 

Sir Keir Starmer should stop running scared of the misogynistic community controllers and their quislings who appear in the form of cultural relativist obsessed sociology professors, and ban a practice the overwhelming majority, from every community in Britain, want to see ended for good.'

Dr Patrick Nash, an expert on religious law and director of the Pharos Foundation social science research group in Oxford, said it was 'truly dismaying to see NHS England publishing official 'educational' material that promotes the supposed social benefits of cousin marriage without even mentioning its proven links to honour violence, gender discrimination, multifarious forms of clan corruption, and the immense cost to the taxpayer'.

Dr Nash added: 'Cousin marriage is incest, plain and simple, and needs to be banned with the utmost urgency – there is no 'balance' to be struck between this cultural lifestyle choice and the severe public health implications it incurs. 

'This official article is deeply misleading and should be retracted with an apology so that the public is not misled by omission and half-truths.'

This graphic, from NHS material distributed to couples in Bradford, explains some of the genetic risks of having children with a close relative. Two parents with a recessive gene have an increased chance of having a child with an inherited condition

A YouGov poll earlier this year found that three quarters of Britons support a ban, with only 9 per cent thinking the law should remain as it is.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-15140539/NHS-cousin-marriages-risk-birth-defects-women.html