Yet another proposed UN resolution against Israel
I am unsurprised by yet another Arab backed UN resolution against Israel. Here from the Independent.
The United States last night vetoed a UN Security Council resolution condemning Israel in the wake of the artillery attack which killed 18 Palestinian civilians last week in the northern Gaza town of Beit Hanoun.Of course France and Russia backed it (do they share leadership?) and the US vetoed it:
Britain abstained, France and Russia voted in favour, but America refused to allow the United Nations to condemn the Israelis after Wednesday's mistaken rocket strike on Beit Hanoun, which killed 19 civilians.
I just love the Independent's title for the article:
US vetoes 'biased' UN resolution attacking Israel's Gaza bloodbath
It implies that not only is the vetoed UN resolution not biased but it is also a bloodbath. It is a terribly sad story - true. But why are Palestinian terror attacks never called bloodbaths? And often not even terrorism.
And of course it was biased. Where are the UN resolutions against Palestinian terrorism? Or other Islamist crimes?
Let us look at this article, I have translated it from a Danish newspaper, "Weekendavisen". It was written by Jesper D. Jensen og Klaus Wivel.
“The moral compass of the UN has been broken for decades. The world organisation does not mirror an objective standard for international justice. 'It mirrors the total sum of the political interests of the member states at a given time.’ [Dore Gold, ex. Israeli UN ambassador]
While there has been particularly horrible infringements of human rights in Tibet, Cambodia, Rwanda and other places without any mentionable UN protests, Israel has been condemned again and again by the world organisation. Israel continues year by year to ignore practically all UN resolutions that commonly conclude that Israel is breaking international law, ruthlessly has suppressed the Palestinians and is a threat against both the regional and global stability.
During the 59. Assembly of the UN 2004-2005, 19 Israel critical resolutions were passed, while not a single was passed condemning the ethnical cleansings and mass murders in Darfur in Islamic Sudan. Israel is without comparison the country that through the history of the General Assembly has received most condemnations.
For the past last years the average has been 20 resolutions, and since the creation of the UN the General Assembly has condemned Israel with around 500 resolutions - or around half of all resolutions concerning condemnations of a country. These numbers are from official Israeli statistics and the UN UNISPAL database.
The General Assembly started having emergency sessions in 1956, and since then 5 out of 10 have been about Israel. In comparison there were no emergency sessions in connection with the murder of a people in Rwanda, the ethnical cleansings and mass murders in the former Yugoslavia or during the last years of barbarism in Sudan, where hundreds of thousands of people have lost their lives.
The Israeli critical tendency has also manifested itself through the UN Commission on Human Rights in Genève. Over the last 40 years around 30 percent of the commission's resolutions, condemning named countries, have been targeting Israel. In comparison the lack of human rights in the Arabic countries or China has been the object of few resolutions.”
It blows my mind that one little country can receive so much attention in the form of condemnation from the UN. It clearly shows the organisation's Muslim colored viewpoint.
To shred some light and present another view I present this link: Arab-Israeli conflict: Basic facts. Some of the facts:
Of the 175 United Nations Security Council resolutions passed before 1990, 97 were directed against Israel. Of the 690 General Assembly resolutions voted on before 1990, 429 were directed against Israel. The U.N. was silent while 58 Jerusalem synagogues were destroyed by the Jordanians. The U.N. was silent while the Jordanians destroyed 58 Jerusalem Synagogues and systematically desecrated the ancient Jewish cemetery on the Mount of Olives. The U.N. was silent while the Jordanians prevented Jews from visiting the Temple Mount and the Western Wall.
This anti-Israel stance of the UN is a natural consequence of its membership structure. 21 members of the UN are Arab countries, and 52 members represent Islamic countries. Since the Arab Israeli conflict is represented as a religious conflict (see article) Israel as the only Jewish state has no chance for a fair hearing in the UN.
Related articles
- What is the evidence that the United Nations is biased against Israel?
- Articles on the role of the UN in the Arab-Israeli conflict
- UN gives green light to Palestinian terror
- Un Names Israel As World’s Top Human Rights Violator
Image from Bosch Fawstin From Fox News: According to the United Nations, the most evil country in the world today is Israel. On March 24, 2016, the U.N. Commission on the Status of Women (CSW) wrapped up its annual meeting in New York by condemning only...
- How Obama’s Demonic Israel Compulsion Is About To End The Un
Today in the Washington Post Jackson Diehl has this to say: Obama’s next earthquake By declaring Israeli-Palestinian peace negotiations dead and blaming Netanyahu, Obama laid the predicate for a decision to go forward with a U.S.-backed U.N. Security...
- U.n. Declares 2014 Year Of “solidarity With The Palestinian People”
The UN needs to go bye-bye. From the Free Beacon: The United Nations overwhelmingly voted to declare 2014 the “International Year of Solidarity with the Palestinian People” during an unprecedented vote that human rights observers say was marred by...
- Hot Mic Catches U.n. Interpreter Saying 9 Resolutions On Israel And 0 On Rest Of World Is "a Little Weird"
The Protocols of the Elders of The United Nations Heh. So they aren't ALL out of the fucking gourds. From Atlas: UN Watch is reporting that a U.N. interpreter spoke the truth today -- unaware that her microphone was on -- as the UN General Assembly...
- The Un, The Officials And The Reality
The UN tried to rejuvenate itself by recreating what it wanted to eliminate, a Council for Human Rights lead by human rights abusers. Chances are we will see in horror more of the same. However, while some are satisfied with the new organization, others...