@hasilpuroriginal: kaha kaha hoi ajj barish #barish #hasilpur #fyp

𝙃𝙖𝙨𝙞𝙡𝙥𝙪𝙧

Open In TikTok:

Region: PK

Saturday 11 April 2026 03:54:43 GMT

35753

1666

52

106

Music

Download

No Watermark .mp4 (0.54MB) No Watermark(HD) .mp4 (0.54MB) Watermark .mp4 (0.54MB) Music .mp3

Comments

Mano princess ❤️❤️ :

kiya bat hai kamaal ho gya

2026-04-11 13:51:27

4

✨ آرائیں کہتے ہیں 🔥 :

esa qismat se hota h or hum bhi qismat se aty hn hasilpur 🥰

2026-04-26 09:39:22

1

Alifaizan :

wahan barish quesmat sy hoti hy

2026-04-12 12:43:23

0

ᴹᴿ°᭄ΑΉḾΑƊ TATLA☂, ☆࿐༵ :

2026-06-03 05:54:20

0

Ahsan Chadhar 194 Murad :

ggggggggg

2026-05-15 04:28:59

0

★彡[ᴊᴜᴛᴛ]彡★ :

okay hogia😁

2026-04-14 10:58:38

1

zidi queen🔥 :

Mera piayara city

2026-04-12 15:39:05

1

Sk Boss :

hasilpur

2026-05-16 03:50:19

0

Pinda Alla :

jeo

2026-05-30 02:14:32

0

Rana Fahad :

same ma be hasilpur saa ho

2026-04-19 09:37:17

0

🅵🅰🆁🅷🅰🅽 :

good 👍😊

2026-04-21 11:01:05

0

@chuckel.fun99 :

Kash 😎

2026-04-14 01:24:58

0

💖ہاصل پور دا راجہ 64 آلہ 🫅☠️ :

Nice

2026-05-02 19:38:04

1

Mare Zindagi A 🥰❤️F :

hello

2026-04-13 04:05:24

0

Parwaiz Ahmad :

Hi o

2026-04-12 14:53:30

1

khaanzadi A khan 💞🍫 :

wha

2026-04-11 15:58:28

1

⚜️🚩[جٹ کہتےہیں]🚩⚜️ :

yaar hasilpur ma barish he bhut kam hoti hai 🙂

2026-04-12 16:57:33

0

Dill kiii Batain :

2026-05-08 16:16:34

1

𝑺𝑨𝑵𝑰𝒀𝑨🍃 :

🍁🍃🥹

2026-04-14 08:37:45

1

mahar kashif. 786 :

🥰🥰🥰

2026-04-12 02:04:12

0

Laiba Ahmad :

☺️☺️

2026-04-12 03:46:36

1

Afaq Arain :

🥰🥰🥰

2026-04-11 06:44:21

1

عالٔشــــــــہ اکبـــــــــــر :

🥰🥰🥰

2026-04-11 11:54:39

1

Sabir Ali :

🥰🥰🥰

2026-04-11 16:51:58

1

عالٔشــــــــہ اکبـــــــــــر :

❤️❤️❤️

2026-04-11 11:54:37

1

To see more videos from user @hasilpuroriginal, please go to the Tikwm homepage.

Other Videos

Portable, rechargeable, and multi-colored: this wall light is the ultimate decor hack. Use it for ambiance, late-night snacks, anything. Link in bio!#HomeVibeUpgrade #StickOnLight #RechargeableLight #ColorProjectorLight #CozyHomeEssentials

Portable, rechargeable, and multi-colored: this wall light is the ultimate decor hack. Use it for ambiance, late-night snacks, anything. Link in bio!#HomeVibeUpgrade #StickOnLight #RechargeableLight #ColorProjectorLight #CozyHomeEssentials

Franco vidal es criticado por su forma de vestirse y acaso la ropa define a la persona ??? #Ate #FrancoVidalTenienteAlcalde #FrancoVidal #francovidalalcalde @Franco Vidal

Franco vidal es criticado por su forma de vestirse y acaso la ropa define a la persona ??? #Ate #FrancoVidalTenienteAlcalde #FrancoVidal #francovidalalcalde @Franco Vidal

#FathersDay #fathersdaygift #dadgift

#FathersDay #fathersdaygift #dadgift

#peptide #skincare #biohacking #fyb

#peptide #skincare #biohacking #fyb

Israel and its lobby have, for years now, been engaged in a frenzy of activity to further insulate Israel from accountability by using their influence in the West to effectively outlaw organized opposition to Israel. Foremost among these efforts has been the Israeli campaign to penalize calls to boycott, divest from, and sanction Israel for its gross violations of human rights. As a result, countless laws and policies are now on the books across the U.S. and the broader West, trampling on core constitutional principles and internationally guaranteed human rights in defense of Israeli impunity. But an advisory opinion issued last month by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) should help to turn that around. In its historic ruling, the ICJ found that Israel’s occupation of the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and Gaza is entirely unlawful, that Israel practices apartheid and racial segregation, and that all states are under a duty to help bring this to an end, including by cutting off all economic, trade and investment relations with Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory. In other words, as a matter of international law, all countries are obliged to participate in an economic boycott of Israel’s activities in the occupied Palestinian territory and to divest from any existing economic relations there. Because the court was bound by the parameters of the request from the UN General Assembly that triggered its findings, it did not address duties and obligations relating to activities inside the 1948 Green Line. However, the court’s authoritative statement of the requirements of international law makes clear that proponents of BDS have not only the moral high ground but also a firm grounding in international law. The court’s advisory opinion in July comes on the heels of the commencement of genocide proceedings against Israel in the ICJ last December, and a request in May by the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court for arrest warrants for the Israeli Prime Minister and the Defense Minister for crimes against humanity, including extermination. Together, they represent a historic shift away from 76 years of Western-sponsored Israeli exceptionalism and impunity, feeding hope of a new era of accountability. Recognizing this, Israel, as well as its Western allies accused of complicity in Israel’s international crimes (chief among them, the U.S., UK, and Germany) have been scrambling to oppose, delay, and obstruct action by these courts, both by intervening in court proceedings and, in some cases, by threatening court officials. And indeed, the ICC warrant process has already been inordinately delayed when compared to previous cases. Nevertheless, for its part, the ICJ advisory opinion was both timely and uncompromising in its application of international law to Israel. Israel and its allies also defensively claim that advisory opinions of the ICJ are “non-binding” and, indeed, the court cannot compel a state to comply with its findings. But what this tactic ignores is that the laws to which the court refers in its authoritative opinion are, in fact, binding on all states. For example, the court observed that the right of the Palestinians to self-determination, their rights under international human rights and humanitarian law, and the prohibition of Israel’s acquisition of territory by force impose so-called “erga omnes” obligations, that is, binding obligations that apply to all countries. Among these obligations are the duty not to recognize or assist the occupation in any way, and the duty to take action to realize the equal rights and self-determination of the Palestinian people. It follows that any policies or acts by a Western country that in any way recognize Israel’s occupation, assist Israel in that occupation (economically, militarily, diplomatically, etc.), or prohibit persons under its jurisdiction from respecting international law by boycotting or divesting from Israel’s illegal occupation, would be unlawful.

Israel and its lobby have, for years now, been engaged in a frenzy of activity to further insulate Israel from accountability by using their influence in the West to effectively outlaw organized opposition to Israel. Foremost among these efforts has been the Israeli campaign to penalize calls to boycott, divest from, and sanction Israel for its gross violations of human rights. As a result, countless laws and policies are now on the books across the U.S. and the broader West, trampling on core constitutional principles and internationally guaranteed human rights in defense of Israeli impunity. But an advisory opinion issued last month by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) should help to turn that around. In its historic ruling, the ICJ found that Israel’s occupation of the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and Gaza is entirely unlawful, that Israel practices apartheid and racial segregation, and that all states are under a duty to help bring this to an end, including by cutting off all economic, trade and investment relations with Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory. In other words, as a matter of international law, all countries are obliged to participate in an economic boycott of Israel’s activities in the occupied Palestinian territory and to divest from any existing economic relations there. Because the court was bound by the parameters of the request from the UN General Assembly that triggered its findings, it did not address duties and obligations relating to activities inside the 1948 Green Line. However, the court’s authoritative statement of the requirements of international law makes clear that proponents of BDS have not only the moral high ground but also a firm grounding in international law. The court’s advisory opinion in July comes on the heels of the commencement of genocide proceedings against Israel in the ICJ last December, and a request in May by the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court for arrest warrants for the Israeli Prime Minister and the Defense Minister for crimes against humanity, including extermination. Together, they represent a historic shift away from 76 years of Western-sponsored Israeli exceptionalism and impunity, feeding hope of a new era of accountability. Recognizing this, Israel, as well as its Western allies accused of complicity in Israel’s international crimes (chief among them, the U.S., UK, and Germany) have been scrambling to oppose, delay, and obstruct action by these courts, both by intervening in court proceedings and, in some cases, by threatening court officials. And indeed, the ICC warrant process has already been inordinately delayed when compared to previous cases. Nevertheless, for its part, the ICJ advisory opinion was both timely and uncompromising in its application of international law to Israel. Israel and its allies also defensively claim that advisory opinions of the ICJ are “non-binding” and, indeed, the court cannot compel a state to comply with its findings. But what this tactic ignores is that the laws to which the court refers in its authoritative opinion are, in fact, binding on all states. For example, the court observed that the right of the Palestinians to self-determination, their rights under international human rights and humanitarian law, and the prohibition of Israel’s acquisition of territory by force impose so-called “erga omnes” obligations, that is, binding obligations that apply to all countries. Among these obligations are the duty not to recognize or assist the occupation in any way, and the duty to take action to realize the equal rights and self-determination of the Palestinian people. It follows that any policies or acts by a Western country that in any way recognize Israel’s occupation, assist Israel in that occupation (economically, militarily, diplomatically, etc.), or prohibit persons under its jurisdiction from respecting international law by boycotting or divesting from Israel’s illegal occupation, would be unlawful.

About

Robot
API

Legal

Privacy Policy