On November 2, 1917, Foreign Secretary Arthur James Balfour writes an important letter to Britain’s most illustrious Jewish citizen, Baron Lionel Walter Rothschild, expressing the British government’s support for a Jewish homeland in Palestine. The letter would eventually become known as the Balfour Declaration.

Britain’s support for the Zionist movement came from its concerns regarding the direction of the First World War. Aside from a genuine belief in the righteousness of Zionism, held by Lloyd George among others, Britain’s leaders hoped that a statement supporting Zionism would help gain Jewish support for the Allies.

The influence of the Balfour Declaration on the course of post-war events was immediate: According to the “mandate” system created by the Versailles Treaty of 1919, Britain was entrusted with the administration of Palestine, with the understanding that it would work on behalf of both its Jewish and Arab inhabitants.

Source: history.com

I would say the idea that anyone thought giving Britain or Zionist control in the first place wasn’t offensive seems odd to me, not only because they decided without the Palestinians that Britain would be entrusted with the administration of Palestine, with the understanding that it would work on behalf of both its Jewish and Arab inhabitants. Of course, that didn’t happen, and what could go wrong did go wrong, and decades later, genocide is taking place, and the question remains: Why did they think this mission would stay quiet? That is sarcasm … some always knew a whole lot of people stayed quiet.

How could Americans and NATO look the other way, and why weren’t the Brits held liable or accountable, btw they all could have done the right thing by correcting it all, but it seems as if supremacy and elitism are beyond humanity Nativegrl77. We know every issue can have several sides, but facts are tough to ignore, especially when they are documented.

United Nations Resolution 181

Palestinian history

HISTORY

United Nations Resolution 181, a resolution passed by the United Nations (UN) General Assembly in 1947 that called for the partition of Palestine into Arab and Jewish states, with the city of Jerusalem as a corpus separatum (Latin: “separate entity”) to be governed by a special international regime. The resolution, which was considered by the Jewish community in Palestine to be a legal basis for the establishment of Israel, and which was rejected by the Arab community—was succeeded almost immediately by violence.

Palestine had been governed by Great Britain since 1922. Since that time, Jewish immigration to the region increased, and tensions between Arabs and Jews grew. In April 1947, exhausted by World War II and increasingly intent upon withdrawing from the Middle East region, Britain referred the issue of Palestine to the UN. To investigate a suitable course of action, the UN formed the UN Special Committee on Palestine (UNSCOP), an inquiry committee made up of members from 11 countries. Ultimately, UNSCOP delivered two proposals: that of the majority, which recommended two separate states joined economically, and that of the minority, which supported the formation of a single binational state made up of autonomous Jewish and Palestinian areas. The Jewish community approved of the first of these proposals, while the Arabs opposed them both. A counterproposal—including a provision that only those Jews who had arrived before the Balfour Declaration (and their descendants) would be citizens of the state—did not win Jewish favour.

The proposal to partition Palestine, based on a modified version of the UNSCOP majority report, was put to a General Assembly vote on November 29, 1947. The fate of the proposal was initially uncertain, but, after a period of intense lobbying by pro-Jewish groups and individuals, the resolution was passed with 33 votes in favour, 13 against, and 10 abstentions.

britannica.com

This article was most recently revised and updated by Amy McKenna, Senior Editor.

The dominant mood in the Arab world was one of outright rejection. 

U.N. votes for partition of Palestine…

And as they say, the rest is, sadly, history! A history very few want to claim and/or accept!

Today, the behavior of the 1900s continues!

What price for the beliefs, actions of Racism and control? It could be me, but it feels like how Native Americans were treated by Settlers. The ultimate goal was to remove or burn people out to gain land, legacy, and squash someone else and their religious beliefs …

Sources: britannica.com

Congress votes for independence

In 1776, the Second Continental Congress, assembled in Philadelphia, formally adopted Richard Henry Lee’s resolution for independence from Great Britain. The vote is unanimous, with only New York abstaining.

The Bristol Bay Protection Act is a U.S. federal bill introduced in 2024 (H.R. 8193) by Rep. Mary Sattler Peltola (D-AK) to prohibit and restrict certain actions in the Bristol Bay watershed to protect its salmon resources and ecological integrity  While the bill has not yet been enacted into law, it is part of the broader legislative and legal fight over the proposed Pebble Mine in Alaska.

Purpose and Scope

The Act:

• Prohibits the specification of the Pebble Mine project area as a disposal site under the Clean Water Act.
• Restricts actions that could discharge dredged or fill material into waters of the United States, including wetlands, in the Bristol Bay watershed.
• Addresses the EPA’s 2023 veto of the Pebble Mine, which cited unacceptable adverse effects on salmon streams, wetlands, and fisheries 

Key Environmental Concerns

The bill’s findings highlight:

• Loss of ~8.5 miles of documented anadromous fish streams.
• Loss of ~91 miles of additional streams supporting salmon.
• Loss of ~2,108 acres of wetlands and other waters supporting salmon.
• Adverse impacts on ~29 miles of salmon streams from greater than 20% changes in streamflow

Legislative and Legal Context

• Introduced: May 1, 2024, in the House, referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 
• Not enacted: As of now, the bill remains in the legislative process and has not passed both chambers or been signed into law
• Parallel legal action: The Pebble Mine case (Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd. v. EPA) is ongoing in federal court, with a major DOJ response deadline in February 2026 and oral arguments in June 2026 
• Alaska Legislature: In Juneau, lawmakers are also debating the Bristol Bay Forever Act, which aims to provide permanent protections for the watershed 

Why It Matters

The Bristol Bay watershed is home to the world’s largest sockeye salmon run and is central to Alaska Native cultures. The Act and related measures seek to prevent irreversible damage from mining-related discharges, which could threaten salmon populations, municipal water supplies, shellfish beds, and subsistence livelihoods 

In summary: The Bristol Bay Protection Act of 2026 is not yet law, but it is a key legislative tool in the ongoing battle to protect Bristol Bay’s salmon and ecosystems from the Pebble Mine. Its fate will depend on congressional action, while the federal court case could set a precedent regarding the EPA’s authority to block such projects.

Sources: Congress.gov, GovTrack.us, MidCurrent