Mont Royal’s Updated Ashram PEA Pegs Rare Earths Project at $2 Billion NPV

Putting the current Iran war into context … Iran’s war today – not an isolated eruption; but the latest phase of a century‑long struggle over Jewish sovereignty in the Middle East. Zionism, not a romantic project; but rather a response to existential threat repeatedly exposed by church and mosque inherited racial criminal insanity. The UN today continues this tradition where external powers have long repeatedly attempted to engineer the demographic and political fate of Jews. Iran adopts and amplifies this narrative, positioning itself as the champion of “resistance” to Zionism. Tehran’s ideology fuses Shi’a revolutionary theology with the older Arab rejectionist line: Israel is a colonial imposition that must be undone. After the fall of Nasserism and the decline of pan‑Arabism, the Islamic Republic of Iran positioned itself as the central patron of anti‑Israel forces.

Theodor Herzl wrote in “Der Judenstaat”: “The Jewish question is a national question, and to solve it we must establish a home for the Jewish people.” … Jews have equal rights to achieve self determination in our own country. To do this Jews must partner with a great power who likewise endorse a Jewish state…”We shall need the patronage of a great power; and if we can secure that, we can realize our purpose. We must therefore appeal to the great powers of the world, and we must address ourselves to the Jewish question in these terms.”

The White Paper explicitly framed its goal as preventing Palestine from becoming a Jewish state and ensuring an Arab majority in any independent Palestine that would emerge post war. Its deliberate restrictions on Jewish immigration to mandate Palestine, based upon the European racism which directly and indirectly contributed to the slaughter of 75% of Western European Jewry proves Herzl’s estimation of Europe’s racial insanity toward Jews. The Iran–Israel war, to state it plainly: not new. Rather, simply the modern extension of the same struggle over Jewish self‑determination that Herzl identified in the 1890s and that the region has fought over ever since.

Chamberlain’s White Paper serves as the basis for the European attempt to declare and validate a Palestinian state today; the White Paper explicitly stated this goal: “the establishment within 10 years of an independent Palestine State”. London favored the establishment of an Arab majority, which would rule Palestine; Chamberlain repeated the Czech betrayal, and limited Jewish immigration capped at 75,000 over five years (April 1939–April 1944) and further immigration requiring Arab consent.

The White Paper’s restrictions deliberately imposed – at the moment when Nazi Germany and fascist Europe were carrying out the systematic murder of approximately six million Jews (75 % of Western European Jewry). The paper was issued while the Shoah – already under way, and while Britain itself – still neutral in the European war against the Jews. Its framers chose to freeze Jewish immigration at a level that would prevent the Jewish population from ever reaching majority status in a future independent Palestine.

The policy was rooted in the same 19th–20th-century European political and demographic anxieties that had already produced racial antisemitism (the “Jewish Question” as a perceived racial/cultural threat). The White Paper’s language of “absorptive capacity,” “economic conditions,” and constitutional guarantees of Arab majority rule echoed the same underlying worldview that had justified pogroms, expulsions, and later the Nuremberg Laws. It was not a sudden invention of the 1930s; it was the logical culmination of the Mandate’s earlier pro-immigration framework having produced the very demographic shift the White Paper now blocked. Herzl’s entire project rested on the recognition that European societies were racially and culturally “insane” toward Jews; Zionism represents his prescription for a rational exit from that European-Shoah-guilt insanity.

The post ’48 Nakba narrative, not a neutral “national trauma story”. Nakba bemoaned the Arab failed war of annihilation to destroy the Jewish community in the territory of the defunct British mandate. The term “Palestine” reintroduced consequent to the ‘Sick Man of Europe’s’ economic bankruptcy, did Sultans hire cheaper French cartographers in the 18th Century; that European ‘great power’ reintroduced Palestine upon Ottoman maps of the Middle East. Prior to that time no Ottoman map listed “Greater Syria” as Palestine nor Istanbul as Constantinople.

After the Battle of Yarmouk (636 CE) Arab forces defeated the Byzantine field army and took control of much of the Levant. The territory became part of the rapidly expanding Rashidun (and later Umayyad) Caliphate and administered as the Jund Dimashq, Jund Filastin, Jund al-Urdunn; “wilāya/walayāt” (provinces), a separate term used in different periods. Jund al-Urdunn: first instituted under the Rashidun Caliphate (reorganization under Caliph ʿUmar, c. 639). Jund Filastin: organized soon after the Muslim conquest in the 630s — established during the Rashidun period and continued under the Umayyads. Jund Dimashq: likewise created during the early (Rashidun) reorganizations after the conquest and continued under the Umayyad administration. Modern scholarly syntheses conclude the ajnad framework – established by the Rashidun reorganization (traditionally attributed to ʿUmar c. 18 AH / 639 CE) and consolidated under the Umayyads. Modern scholarly syntheses conclude the ajnad framework – established by the Rashidun reorganization and consolidated under the Umayyads.

Throughout the years of the British colonial-mandate, Arabs fundamentally rejected the Balfour Declaration to establish a Jewish national home in Palestine. The post ’48 Nakba narrative, not a neutral “national trauma story”. Nakba bemoaned the Arab failed war of annihilation to destroy the Jewish community in the territory of the defunct British colonial-mandate. No great power Ottoman map listed “Greater Syria” as Palestine nor Istanbul as Constantinople.

Throughout the years of the British mandate, Arabs fundamentally rejected the Balfour Declaration to establish a Jewish national home in Palestine. Nakba – not “we lost our homes” but “we lost the war which we launched to prevent Jewish self-determination in Palestine. Nakba not free-floating “national trauma” as UNWRA propaganda depicts.

Historically there exists a regional concept of Filastin in early Islamic and later periods. But never sovereign Arab “Palestinian nation-state” as UN propaganda votes which condemn Israeli violations of “international law” harp and sing as if the UN exists as a heavenly voice. European cartography re‑standardized “Palestine” as a territorial label, which later became the basis for post ’67 UN fart: which bemoans the crimes of Israeli “occupied territories”. While its Resolution 3379 ignores the PLO Charter of ’64 which denounces only ’48 Israel as “occupied territories”.

Herzl stated that the Jewish question – fundamentally a national one. He advocated for a homeland, based upon the inherited European racism; that only through Jewish self-determination can Jew overcome racial inherited European hatred.

He emphasized that achieving this goal requires the support of a great power. The term “Palestine” – reintroduced on Ottoman maps due to changes in regional governance and economic Ottoman bankruptcy, Ben Gurion rejected when he named the new nation Israel. Prior to WWI, the region – commonly referred to in the context of “Greater Syria” without the designation of “Palestine.” This change reflects the evolving geopolitical landscape of this region.

Throughout the British Mandate period, Arab opposition to the Balfour Declaration highlighted a rejection of the notion of a Jewish homeland, arguing that their struggle emphatically fought against Jewish self-determination. Therefore the term Nakba – not simply characterized through the UN propaganda distortion as – simply as a loss of homes. Rather, the fallout consequences of a failed war; specifically aimed at preventing Jewish self-determination. These facts fundamentally reject UN attempts to inject revisionist history which fundamentally denies the right of Israel as a nation state to determine its own international borders with other Arab states, specifically with Egypt, Jordan, Syria, and Lebanon.

European permanent Security Council members repeatedly publicly declare: “That Israel has the right to self defense”. But they equally declare that the UN has the right to declare a “Palestinian State”; which they demand come from East Jerusalem, Samaria, and Gaza. Neither the Security Council members nor the General Assembly states possess the might of “international law” – despite their obtuse propaganda otherwise – to determine the borders of the Jewish State nor create the borders of a Palestinian state. Wars throughout history, Poland for example, shape and determine the borders of nation-states.

Consequent to the Bar Kochba Revolt (132-136 CE) the Romans forcibly expelled Jews from Judea and renamed the conquered territory Palaestina, a term derived from “Philistine” – to permanently destroy the Jewish nation state of Judea; which achieved national Independence celebrated and remembered through the mitzva of lighting the Hanukkah lights. The consequence of this Jewish defeat – Jews endured a stateless refugee status till post Shoah! Today Arab refugees who fled from Judea, and Arab refugee populations captured by the IDF post ’67, no different from post Bar Kochba Jews.

UN resolutions simply political, not some pie in the sky divine law decreed from Mt. Olympus. No GA vote or SC statement has the inherent power to fix Israel’s borders or magically conjure a Palestinian state. Attempts to do so, they directly compare to UN GA Resolution 3379 or UN SC Resolution 2334. UN moral theater does not determine the international borders of the Jewish State of Israel. The UN did not “create” Israel. Israel like the American Revolution won its national Independence against colonial British imperialism and French pre-’67 perfidy – through war. Attempts by the UN to recognize a “Palestinian State” simply the hallow echo chamber of Rome renaming Judea Palaestina.

Herzl’s answer to the Jewish question—a sovereign Jewish state backed by great‑power recognition—remains a legitimate national solution. Arab rejection of that solution, the 1948 war, the Nakba narrative, and all of subsequent UN/European condemnations which denounce Israel’s illegal occupation of Palestine. Such stinking backside noise directly smells like long, sophisticated UN attempt to undo Herzl’s solution; to re‑cast a war against Jewish self‑determination as pure victimhood, to retro‑invent a sovereign “Palestine” that never existed, and to deny Israel the same right every other nation has had—to let history, war, and nation-states treaty agreements determine its borders. Not by external powers repeating Rome’s old trick with new legal language, and pretending that Palestine as a UN Protectorate territory ceased to exist in 1948 – which categorizes the backside stench made by both the ICJ and the ICC.

Zionism a response to pogroms, exclusion, and the collapse of Jewish emancipation in Europe; a legitimate national movement grounded in Herzl’s analysis of Jewish self‑determination and inherited Goyim racism. “Palestine” as a sovereign Arab nation-state never existed. European cartographers standardized the term “Palestine” in the 18th-19th centuries which reflected European great power interests which later carved up the Ottoman empire between England and France. Despite Arab sources Filastin, never a sovereign Palestinian state ever in Arab and Muslim history. The Nakba narrative today stands as a politically constructed propaganda; no UN resolutions can dictate Israel’s borders or undo the outcome of any Israeli war victory – fought since the Independence war.

During colonial British mandate the 1936–39 Arab Revolt fought explicitly against the establishment of any Zionist-entity in colonial British Palestine. The popular Arab propaganda of Nakba today – simply propaganda lies – it fails to acknowledge the some 850,000 Jewish refugees forcibly expelled from all Arab countries after the Arab Nakba defeat in 1948. This UN propaganda which routinely catagorically slanders 3379 Israel – pretends that Chapter VI recommendations = to Chapter VII ultimatums like issued to North Korea.

The Israeli 1949 Armistice lines shaped by war, not by UN fiat. The push for a Palestinian state is political, not legal. The propaganda which condemns Israel breaking “international law” simple a fart and nothing more. The UN aint the Pope. Post Shoah the UN failed to try Pius XII for war crimes which include the post war rat-lines and pogroms in Catholic Poland. Furthermore the church criminal slanders which culminated in the Shoah totally undermine the church and the UN as vicar from heaven moral authorities.

The modern “Palestinian national identity” is a result of 20th-century political developments, particularly in response to Zionism and British rule. While not a pre-1948 sovereign state, the Arab population in the region developed a distinct national consciousness. Most international bodies and historians view the current conflict not as a fight over a lost ancient state, but as a clash between two national movements (Zionism and Palestinian nationalism) over the same land.

The problem with this smelly revisionist history, Arabs lost their repeated attempts to throw the Jews into the Sea. Actions have their consequences. The repeated Arab defeats to duplicate the ways of Hitler, Chamberlain and Pius XII definitively proves that Arafat’s ’64 PLO “Balestinians”, never merited the “mandate from heaven” to rule as an Independent nation – not in past Arab/Muslim Ages nor today. Just as Jews post Bar Kochba lost our national Independence following that disastrous “Nakba” defeat; how much more so Arab refugees who never ruled Muslim Ottoman Greater Syria as an independence nation – post ’48 lost all claims to self determination claims. No different than post WWI & WWII Germany who lost all claims to Prussia as Germanic self determination.

The attempt repeatedly made by post ’67 UN Resolutions (242, 338, 446, 2334) to make a טיפש פשט limitation to “the conflict as indeed a clash between two nationalist movements” what an utter farce! Iran some 1000 miles distant from Israel. Hezbollah Shiites in Lebanon have no connection what so ever with Arab Sunni refugee populations within the borders of the Jewish State. Post Shoah “NEVER AGAIN”, means that mentally deranged racists shall never again decide for the Jews their racist versions of their “FINAL SOLUTIONS”.

For nearly 2,000 years of exile (since the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 CE), this phrase L’shanah haba’ah b’Yerushalayim, spoken by Jews in every corner of the globe, from Spain to Persia to the Americas. It served as a constant reminder that the Jewish people had not abandoned their claim to the land, nor had they assimilated into the lands where they lived as minorities. The fact that this prayer survived the horrors of g’lut and recited every Pesach by millions who had never seen the city, proof that Jews never surrendered our Torah oath brit inheritance, which explicitly excluded both Yishmael and Esav. The 1948 establishment of the State of Israel and the reunification of Jerusalem in 1967, viewed by Jews as the historical fulfillment of this centuries-old Torah brit oath.

The post war Israeli victory starting in ’48 … after the fact couch potato quarterbacks … they do not determine Israeli identity. Britain returned the mandate after the Irgun blew up British headquarters in the King David Hotel. France lost WWII and thereafter its colonial empire in both Vietnam and Algeria disintegrated. The De Gaulle reversal of the French military alliance, just prior to the expected Nasser obliteration of the Jewish state definitively proved Herzl’s analysis as correct.

Trump 1.0 Abraham Accords rejects as hog-wash the notion of clash between two national movements with deep historical roots, both claiming legitimacy over the same land. Israeli strategic foreign policy seeks to integrate Israel into the community of nations of the Middle East and North Africa. Arab refugee populations and the failure of Arab and Muslim state to repatriate their refugee populations – an Arab/Muslim problem NOT an Israeli problem. Israel eventually gave ’48 Arabs Israeli citizenship. UN Resolution 194 does not apply across the board to as yet unfought Arab Israeli wars like 1967! That PA criticized the Accords does not amount to squat; that treaty cut with nation states and not minority populations scattered across the Planet Earth.