The UN once again proves how morally bankrupt it is by saying hey, let’s reward violent terrorists with a state!
And the AP does its thing. I’m referring to the article’s headline: “US vetoes widely supported resolution backing full UN membership for Palestine.” You see, it’s “widely supported” – by the many tyrannies, corrupt banana republics (except ours), failed nations, and enabling and cowardly first-world countries.
The lede:
The United States vetoed a widely backed U.N. resolution Thursday that would have paved the way for full United Nations membership for Palestine, a goal the Palestinians have long sought and Israel has worked to prevent.
Nasty US, nasty Israel, harming the poor suffering Palestinians who so very much deserve UN membership. Actually, the Palestinians are already the greatest beneficiaries of the UN, having been financially supported by UNRWA – and educated in Jew-hatred by UNWRA – for pretty much the duration of Israel’s existence.
More:
The vote in the 15-member Security Council was 12 in favor, the United States opposed and two abstentions, from the United Kingdom and Switzerland. U.S. allies France, Japan and South Korea supported the resolution.
The UK and Switzerland have shown modified and tepid good sense by at least not voting for the measure.
Here’s the official position of the Biden administration:
Since the attacks of October 7, President Biden has been clear that sustainable peace in the region can only be achieved through a two-state solution, with Israel’s security guaranteed. There is no other path that guarantees Israel’s security and future as a democratic Jewish state.
There is no other path that guarantees Palestinians can live in peace and with dignity in a state of their own. And there is no other path that leads to regional integration between Israel and all its Arab neighbors, including Saudi Arabia.
We also have long been clear that premature actions here in New York, even with the best intentions, will not achieve statehood for the Palestinian people.
“With Israel’s security guaranteed” is the important part. Until that happens, Palestinians will not be living “in peace and with dignity in a state of their own.” And I see no path to that except obliteration of Hamas, and occupation by some entity or entities that will be reshaping the minds of the people there and in particular the coming generations. Tall order, to say the least – taller, I believe, than in postwar Germany and Japan, although at least the number of people involved is much smaller.
At the moment I can’t find the link where I read it, but apparently the US announced in advance of the vote that it intended to use its veto. This had the effect of giving cover to the other nations to vote for admittance or to abstain, saying to the terrorist crocodile: “Please, Mr. Crocodile, please eat me last!” It also allowed the European nations in the Security Council to placate their sizable Muslim populations, knowing that because of the US’s veto there would be no real consequences.
I’m actually surprised that the Biden administration had the cojones to veto the resolution.
The UN has long been in the business of rewarding the worst terrorist attacks of the Palestinians, beginning with the Munich massacre that got so much notoriety and Arafat’s subsequent 1974 appearance there. He addressed the General Assembly, saying, among other things:
Our resolve to build a new world is fortified — a world free of colonialism, imperialism, neo-colonialism and racism in each of its instances, including zionism.
That’s what the Soviets taught him to say, and he learned his lesson well.
More:
Our world aspires to peace, justice, equality and freedom. It wishes that oppressed nations, bent under the weight of imperialism, might gain their freedom and their right to self-determination.
Sure thing; that’s what the Palestinians want. Every leftist buzzword is there – as far back as fifty years ago.
Actually, Arafat was laughing at them all:
In an article last week about dramatic moments at the United Nations (“Laughter at Trump among a long line of shocking U.N. moments“), the Associated Press covers up the most dramatic element of Yasser Arafat’s 1974 United Nations address: that he brought a gun to the international body and even delivered the address while openly sporting the holster.
In his Sept. 26 article, Tamer Fakahany obscures that Yasser Arafat actually brought his gun to the United Nations and wore the holster during his address, instead presenting the unprecedented nature of his appearance there as relating only to the statement: “Today, I have come bearing an olive branch and a freedom fighter’s gun.Do not let the olive branch fall from my hand. I repeat: Do not let the olive branch fall from my hand.” …
(According to an earlier AP report, he was forced to deposit the gun before mounting the rostrum.)
AP’s Sept. 28 2012 account of the same speech explicitly stated in the heading “Yasser Arafat brings his gun to the U.N.” It also contained the key information omitted from last week’s report: “Arafat appeared wearing his gun belt and holster, reluctantly removing his pistol before mounting the rostrum.”
It was a threat from Arafat. He knew how to do political theater, and it has served the Palestinians in their bid to gain sympathy and support from the West while they nurture and act out their destructive and violent hated of Israel, the Jews, and the West.
Gaza residents will not change their stripes for a generation at least. Funding them, as it seems Congress is working on, just promotes their H8
One side of the conflict committed appalling atrocities on the other, breaking a cease-fire, and idiots at the UN want to give them a “state” with undefined borders. I take it back; this isn’t idiocy, it’s insanity combined with evil.
I’m actually surprised that the Biden administration had the cojones to veto the resolution.
Me too. The WH staff must be having a nervous breakdown between trying to appease the deranged terrorist supporters in Michigan and the state department and not driving away the quietly angry Democrats—a large number I suspect, or at least hope—who support Israel.
How did the UN become morally bankrupt?
Two ways. Gradually, then suddenly.
When the UN was formed there was great hope that it would provide a forum for nations to work out their differences diplomatically.
What the democracies did not see was how many small sh*thole countries aren’t democracies and are adamantly opposed to freedom and democracy. They have mostly gravitated toward the supporting other authoritarian governments. They will gladly take aid from Uncle Sam but will spit in his face at the UN.
Only about 17% of the world’s population lives in democratic countries. In 1991 when the USSR fell apart, we in the West believed that democracy and freedom were on the rise and would take hold in the majority of the world. Many humans in these authoritarian countries may be longing for democracy and freedom, but those in control are not. IMO, we must recognize that the world is now basically divided into nations that are democratically governed and authoritarian governments.
There are many kinds of dictatorial systems. Communism, fascism, theocracies, autocracies, banana republic’s, etc. All of them align with
each other because they dislike democracy, which limits their authority and power.
Fortunately, the democracies are generally more successful economically and stronger militarily than the dictatorships. That means that if the democracies unite and stand together, they can stand up to the authoritarian bullies. The democratic lead nations need to understand that.
The democracies need to get their own houses in order and restore actual rule by the will of the people, J.J.
two things happened, unlike fukuyama, the forces of evil understood history did not end in 1991, it just reset to 1917, wahhabism which had purchase in the arabian peninsula and also some parts of india, roared like a lion, Marxism didn’t go away, it was largely driven under ground in Russia, hence the 1996 election, it was cast aside in China for a time, but in the West the seed pods which is where it started after all, in Germany and the UK, sprouted again, Karl Marx loitering in the British museum, many of these currents like syndicalism, the cousin to Fascism, the Dirigiste economics of Germany up until 1931,
were a reaction to same, the Austrian school was a reaction to them
Miguel does a good job of tracing the rise of under-cover Marxism, Wahhabism, and other authoritarian movements since 1991. We need to quit believing that these thugs, jihadis, and grifters want freedom and democracy. They want to be in charge and live large.
“The democracies need to get their own houses in order and restore actual rule by the will of the people, J.J.” – Kate
True dat. Twenty-five years ago, I thought the Anglosphere was moving in the right direction. I was wrong. Neo-Marxism has wormed its way into Great Britain, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and here. Trump is the anti-Neo-Marxist. That’s why he’s hated so. The outlook isn’t bright.
What is the answer to this disaster? I don’t know, really. Don’t get me wrong, I’m with Israel and the Jewish people 100%, they are doing what needs to be done. However, does the destruction of Hamas mean that Israel will be safe, I doubt it; there is still ISIS, Hezbollah, Iran, Quatar, etc, etc. Then, what to do with the Palestinians?
It’s a little puzzling. At first, one might think that if countries really wanted to “recognize” a “Palestinian” “state”, they could individually just do that via formal declaration. I don’t know what the established procedure for this is. How did Kosovo become recognized, for example? Come to think of it, there could be a certain parallel there worth investigating, since I suppose one of the deterrents to various countries doing with “Palestine” as I just described would be the fact that Judea and Samaria are currently still formally territory of Jordan, if I remember right – as I doubt that the UN, for example, ever formally recognized Israel as the sovereign power there (maybe the occupying power, if that).
Maybe that’s what’s holding them back. But as I say, if they (the individual countries around the world, I mean, not the UN) balk at recognizing an independent “Palestine” because it would be carving out a piece of what is still formally Jordanian territory, then how did that stop them when it came to Kosovo being carved out of Serbia? Is there any instructive compare/contrast exercise in this?
Philip Sells, here’s an answer to your question about Kosovo.
https://www.bing.com/search?q=how+did+kosovo+become+a+country&form=ANNTH1&refig=a3d6aaf609dc4bc68b65d23b2f87ed94&pc=DCTS&sp=2&ghc=1&lq=0&qs=SC&pq=how+did+koso0&sk=SC1&sc=9-13&cvid=a3d6aaf609dc4bc68b65d23b2f87ed94
War and occupation by a peacekeeping unit of the UN was the beginning. Then they petitioned various nations for recognition.
Since it’s majority Muslim, recognition by Muslim countries was easy to get. Other countries, who felt that Serbia had treated the Kosovars badly, also recognized them. Serbia still doesn’t recognize them. It’s a mixed bag.
Philip Sells:
Take a look. Many countries have indeed recognized a Palestinian state, 140 out of 193.
I doubt many have embassies in Gaza, though. And for the most part they don’t, although Palestine has a presence in quite a few. See this.
Gilad Erdan, Israeli ambassador to the UN, gave his most scathing critique yet. Very well put together and clever to use the UN’s own written words against them.
Even though the UN is not listening, others are and good to have his words documented for posterity.
https://youtu.be/a2YD3X0An9w?si=bvaMtVEo1RZ8iJKj
But what exactly is this “State of Palestine”? Perhaps this is the main question. What exactly is it that the 140 countries are recognizing? Is it a defined piece of territory with a sovereign government and a defined population? Or is it made up of the existing West Bank, Gaza plus whatever bits and crumbs of now-Israeli territory just happen to be owned by Arabs? Or is it the entire geographical territory of West Bank + Gaza + Israel (in spite of the fact that much of this is inhabited by Jews, not Arabs)? Or something in between? What if all of these 140 countries have each recognized different answers to this question?
Anyway, at least Kosovo has a well-defined administrative territory, as far as I can tell; so on that point, I suppose it contrasts with the Palestinian situation.
there is the palestine authority, that runs the west bank and hamas that runs gaza,
there are their pesky settlements in the middle, but to the ‘river to the sea’ is the goal, I think it was edward klein, who wrote a novel about what would have happened if Israel had lost the 67 war, it was quite horrifying,
WRT recognizing Jordanian jurisdiction over the West Bank and East Jerusalem between 1949-1967, only two nations supported it: the UK and Pakistan.
(Talk about massive support…)
the former probably because bagott glubb a British Army officer who had fought the Wahhabis at the tail end of the Iraqi occupation, was in charge of the Arab Legion,
just another benefit of the expeditions in the 10s
https://www.jihadwatch.org/2024/04/uk-manchester-arena-jihad-massacre-survivors-sue-mi5-for-failing-to-stop-jihad-murderer
Virginia and others wondering about the Palestinians:
The “Palestinians” are Muslim, believers in the ideology of Islam, a belief system that Bruce Thornton has aptly described as “chauvinistic supremacism”. A system derived from their Arabic tribal honor-shame culture. They recognized that the people they were conquering had established working societies, with defined sets of guiding principles, etc., so the Muslim leadership (one or more caliphs?) decided to create a competing system that glorified their view of things. Something totally at variance with the Westernized Judeo-Christian developments of the last 2800 or so years, yet strangely bastardizing the Jewish and Christian scriptures.
Now more recent Western scholarship is calling into question their version of Islamic history, the development of the Quran, location of Muhammad’s proselytizing (Petra vs. Mecca, etc.?), doubting if Muhammad existed as an historical person, etc. Following Miguel’s link to Jihad Watch I found Robert Spencer has a new book coming out in October 2024 that will probably summarize much of this recent work: https://www.amazon.com/Muhammad-Critical-Biography-Robert-Spencer/dp/B0CZJRBBPK/
Some people claim there are moderate Muslims who have adopted a more benign interpretation of Islam, while others assert there are no such people in reality, as they are all willing violent jihadis if/when given the chance to succeed in their dominance and supremacism. True or not, one small path of turning at least the potential moderates away from violence is to promulgate the above version of “real” history, causing them to doubt the reality of their cause, ideology, and religion, … and perhaps become more aligned to Westernized thinking. They have no problem adopting our technology when they build weapons or underground tunnels, etc. Maybe they will adopt more of our “democracy” or “republican” governance — granting that a mind is a difficult thing to change. Still, we have evidence here that it can happen. 🙂
While I think Israel is mostly in the right, and is certainly a more admirable civilization worthy of support of any who claim to favor human rights, it remains true that Peace will only be achieved when the Palestinians agree to borders with Israel.
The “recognized” borders are not those which Israel has agreed to. But neither have the Palestinians agreed to live in peace with Israel within those borders, either.
So many folk are willing to believe false info put out by Hamas but then repeated, as fact, by Dem/ Lefty news organs and international organizations. And even Obama Dems who prefer Iran over Bibi & Israel.