Ignoring History When It Interferes With Your Politics

Breitbart.com posted an article today about the UNESCO exhibition that was scheduled to open in Paris on January 20. The exhibition has been cancelled because documents the Jews’ 3,500+ years connection to the Land of Israel, chronicling the timeline from the days of Abraham to the 21st century.

The article reports:

UNESCO cancelled the event, while not disputing the factual basis whatsoever behind the exhibit itself, for fear it may hurt the “peace process.” The event, which had been planned for over two years, was cancelled three days before it was set to open. The successful campaign mounted to cancel the expo can largely be accredited to a last minute protest by the Arab group at UNESCO.

The protest doesn’t change history. The problem with the exhibit is that it reminds people of the history of Israel. The connection between the Jews and Israel goes back thousands of years. The Palestinians did not exist as a people seeking a homeland until after 1967. As Walid Shoebat stated, “One day during the 1960s I went to bed a Jordanian Muslim, and when I woke up the next morning, I was informed that I was now a Palestinian Muslim, and that I was no longer a Jordanian Muslim.”

The article at Breitbart.com reminds us:

The UN has maintained its heavy biases against the State of Israel for many years. Some argue that it has become the sole focus of the entire United Nations system: to engage in a delegitimization campaign against the Jewish state. Israel’s envoy to UNESCO, Nimrod Barkan, once stated that UNESCO has an “obsession” with Israel. In October, UNESCO left a single meeting in Paris declaring it had passed six separate resolutions condemning tiny Israel, but none regarding the rest of the world in its entirety.

According to UN Watch, an incredible 100 percent of UNESCO’s condemnatory resolutions have been in opposition to Israel.

The United Nations may have begun with a beautiful idea–world peace and freedom for all the citizens of the world. Unfortunately, a number of countries that do not support democracy have banned together to form a very influential voting bloc within the organization and have caused the United Nations to stray from its original mission. Rather than condemn terrorist regimes and tyrannies, the organization has focused its condemnation on Israel. It really is time for the United Nations to leave America and go elsewhere. The improvement in the traffic situation in lower Manhattan alone would be astonishing.

Enhanced by Zemanta

This Shouldn’t Be A Surprise To Anyone

Ed Morrissey at Hot Air posted an article today about the United Nation‘s suggested solution to climate change. United Nations climate chief Christiana Figueres stated that democracy is a poor form a government to solve the problem of global warming–communism works much better.

When you consider some of the problems in communist countries in regard to environmental damage, this statement is ridiculous. We remember Chernobyl. We have seen the pictures of Chinese cities where the smog is so thick people are wearing surgical masks.

On Monday, The Federalist posted an article about communism and its impact on the environment. The article reported:

When the Berlin Wall came down and the Iron Curtain was finally lifted to expose the inner workings of communism to Western eyes, one of the more shocking discoveries was the nightmarish scale of environmental destruction. The statistics for East Germany alone tell a horrific tale: at the time of its reunification with West Germany an estimated 42 percent of moving water and 24 percent of still waters were so polluted that they could not be used to process drinking water, almost half of the country’s lakes were considered dead or dying and unable to sustain fish or other forms of life, and only one-third of industrial sewage along with half of domestic sewage received treatment.

An estimated 44 percent of East German forests were damaged by acid rain — little surprise given that the country produced proportionally more sulphur dioxide, carbon dioxide, and coal dust than any other in the world. In some areas of East Germany the level of air pollution was between eight and twelve times greater than that found in West Germany, and 40 percent of East Germany’s population lived in conditions that would have justified a smog warning across the border. Only one power station in East Germany had the necessary equipment to clean sulphur from emissions.

The article at The Federalist concludes:

There is no society, nor has one ever existed, which featured zero pollution or harm to the environment. The only question is how best to manage it, and which system is best positioned to accomplish this. On that question the answer is surely capitalism, home to the world’s richest countries and cleanest environments. It isn’t even close.

Actually, democracy is not the entire answer. The other part of the answer is private property rights and free enterprise. When people own something, they take better care of it. When it pays to invent a cleaner way of doing something, that method gets invented. When people are oppressed by their government, they don’t have the energy to worry about their environment–they are simply worried about getting enough food to feed their families and enough heat to stay warm. Worry about the environment in a communist country is a luxury that people cannot afford.

To suggest that communism is the solution to the (non-existent) problem of global warming is naive at best. Christiana Figueres’ statement shows how far the United Nations has come from the idea of supporting the concept of freedom for all people. The United Nations has become a reflection of the tin-horn dictators that have taken it over in recent years.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Private Property Rights Are Important In America

One of the foundations of the American republic is the concept of private property rights. Occasionally those rights have been under attack and the battle has been lost–for example the Supreme Court decision regarding Kelo and the State of Connecticut. (n June of 2005, the United States Supreme Court ruled that the City of New London, Connecticut, could, under the rule of eminent domain, seize the homes of several homeowners in order to use the land for a purpose that would generate more tax revenue for the City.)  Due to tough economic times (and basic karma), the plant that was built on that site closed and moved to Groton.

At any rate, property rights of Americans have been threatened on numerous occasions. The latest threat comes from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) following the plan already outlined in Agenda 21.

Today’s Washington Examiner is reporting on a new EPA rule:

...the “Water Body Connectivity Report” – that would remove the limiting word “navigable” from “navigable waters of the United States” and replace it with “connectivity of streams and wetlands to downstream waters” as the test for Clean Water Act regulatory authority.

…If approved, the new rule would give EPA unprecedented power over private property across the nation, gobbling up everything near seasonal streams, isolated wetlands, prairie potholes, and almost anything that occasionally gets wet.

Smith and Stewart (House Science, Space, and Technology Committee Chairman Lamar Smith of Texas and Rep. Chris Stewart of Utah, chairman of its environment subcommittee)accuse EPA of “pushing through a rule with vast economic and regulatory implications before the agency’s Science Advisory Board has had an opportunity to review the underlying science.”

If this sounds familiar, it is. This is the language used by the United Nation‘s Agenda 21 program:

As I reported in December 2011 (rightwinggranny.com):

One of the aspects of Agenda 21 is the location of vernal pools and the ‘corridors’ that connect them. Those pools and corridors are then used as excuses to severely limit the use of property. Property owners can be asked to make alterations to their property that are extremely expensive and that might cause them to abandon the property. Property owners can also be severely limited as to what they can do on their own property.

A land grab is a land grab. It doesn’t matter whether it comes from the UN or from our own government–it is still a land grab. Pay attention–this could be coming to your town soon.

Enhanced by Zemanta

How We Got Where We Are In The Middle East

Dr. Michael Rubin is a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and senior lecturer at the Naval Postgraduate School. He posted an article at CNN on Friday entitled, “Why Land For Peace Is Dead.”

The article reminds us that September 18, 1978, Egyptian President Anwar Sadat and Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin signed the so-called Camp David Accords.This agreement set up the idea that Israel could trade land and receive peace in exchange. In 1979, a peace treaty was signed between Israel and Egypt. The Muslim Brotherhood assassinated Anwar Sadat for signing that treaty. Despite the loss of Anwar Sadat, the idea that the Sinal Peninsula had been successfully traded to bring peace brought hope.

Dr. Rubin reminds us:

It was this example that Bill Clinton sought to capitalize upon in the 1993 Oslo Accords. The Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) agreed to recognize Israel and work toward peace in exchange for land in historical Palestine. I was in Bahrain in 1994 when PLO chairman Yasser Arafat entered the Gaza Strip to establish the Palestinian Authority. Enthusiasm was palpable across the region. Within weeks, Jordan had signed its own peace accord with Israel, and Persian Gulf emirates, Tunisia, and Morocco looked like they might follow suit.

The concept of land for peace was also the reason Israel withdrew from Lebanon in 2000.

Dr. Rubin further reminds us:

The logic of land for peace became the basis for Israel’s unilateral withdrawal from southern Lebanon in May 2000. The formula of trading land for peace had already begun to unravel. Israel expected if not peace, then quiet. They had removed the last remaining dispute between Israel and Lebanon. Alas, Israel’s withdrawal foreshadowed greater conflict. Even though the United Nations certified Israel’s withdrawal as complete, Hezbollah laid claim not only to the Shebaa Farms – an Israeli occupied area which historically is part of Syria – but also seven villages in the Galilee, a region well within Israel’s recognized borders.

It sounds as if the concept of land for peace was being exploited early on. From there, things go downhill quickly.

The article reports:

Peace between Israel and the Palestinian Authority was also rapidly deteriorating. Certainly, when it comes to the Arab-Israel conflict, there are always mutual recriminations. What is clear, however, is that Arafat had voided his pledge to resolve future conflict with Israel at the negotiating table. Many commentators mark the beginning of the “Second Intifada” as Likud leader Ariel Sharon’s September 28, 2000 visit to the Temple Mount/Haram al-Sharif. But this is dishonest. On August 24, 2000, several weeks before Sharon’s visit, Palestinian Justice Minister Freih Abu Middein threatened, “Violence is near, and the Palestinian people are willing to sacrifice even 5,000 casualties.” Communications Minister Imad al-Faluji reportedly admitted to Palestinian radio that “Arafat ordered preparations for the current intifada immediately after the Camp David summit, as part of the negotiating process with Israel.” The Oslo Process and the land-for-peace formula that underlay it had begun to breakdown.

There are two very telling quotes in the conclusion of the article:

Most Israelis view their experience of land-for-peace in the same fashion that Native Americans consider their experience with the concept.

...Hamas’ decision to turn Gaza into a forward missile base rather than the engine for an independent Palestine condemns 35 years of peacemaking to history’s garbage bin and sets the stage for a conflict far more disruptive than anyone in the region has seen in a half century.

Israel has been seeking peace since 1948. They are not the problem. Until Hamas seeks peace and acknowledges Israel’s right to exist, there will be no peace.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

About That Flexibility In President Obama’s Second Term

Now that he has been re-elected, President Obama is free to deal with some of his priorities that he was not able to get to in his first term. One of the first is gun control in America.

Yesterday Investors.com reported that President Obama is fast tracking a United Nations gun treaty that will threaten the right of Americans to own guns. It should be noted that President Obama has done more to increase gun sales in America than any previous President. It also should be noted that President Obama has overseen two of the nastiest international gun running operations in America’s history–Fast and Furious and Benghazi (as the news begins to leak out on Benghazi, it will become clear that it was a gun running operation to arm the Syrian opposition–which includes Al Qaeda).

The article reports:

Less than 24 hours after President Obama’s re-election, the U.S. Mission to the United Nations helped move the U.N.’s Arms Control Treaty a step closer to enactment. America joined 157 other nations in voting Wednesday to finalize the treaty in March. None was opposed and there were 18 abstentions.

U.N. delegates and gun-control activists had complained that talks collapsed in July largely because Obama feared attacks from Republican rival Mitt Romney if his administration was seen as openly supporting the pact. But once the election was over, the Obama administration had more flexibility to pull the trigger on supporting the pact.

The article further reports:

Interestingly, just as the world’s worst human rights violators sat on and often chaired the U.N. Human Rights Council, Iran, arms supplier extraordinaire to America’s enemies, was elected to a top position at the U.N. Conference on the Arms Trade Treaty that was held in New York in early July.

The U.S. is one of the few countries that has anything like a Second Amendment, our Founding Fathers enshrining the right to bear arms in our founding principles in recognition of it being the ultimate bulwark against tyrannical government. They were guns owned by civilians that freed us from British tyranny. The fact that tyrants, dictators, thugs and gross human-rights violators want to control small arms worldwide is hardly a surprise.

This is not good news.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Clarity At The United Nations

The contrast was obvious. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad spoke at the United Nations this week. Part of his speech was to encourage the growth of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) which recently met in Tehran.

Here is part of President Ahmadinejad’s speech at the UN:

Unilateralism, application of double standards, and imposition of wars, instability and occupations to ensure economic interests, and expand dominance over sensitive centers of the world have turned to be the order of the day.

Arms race and intimidation by nuclear weapons and weapons of mass-destruction by the hegemonic powers have become prevalent: Testing new generations of ultra-modern weaponry and the pledge to disclose these armaments on due time is now being used as a new language of threat against nations to coerce them into accepting a new era of hegemony. Continued threat by the uncivilized Zionists to resort to military action against our great nation is a clear example of this bitter reality.

-A state of mistrust has cast its shadow on the international relations, whilst there is no trusted or just authority to help resolve world conflicts.

Just for the record, those ‘uncivilized Zionists’ have attempted to live in peace with their neighbors for more than fifty years. It’s the neighbors that have been uncivilized. They have also won more Nobel prizes per capita than any other nation in the world.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu also spoke at the UN last week. His remarks had a very different perspective.

Breitbart.com posted the entire speech, but they also posted sections of the speech that contain truth the world needs to hear:

Israel wants to see a Middle East of progress and peace. We want to see the three great religions that sprang forth from our region, Judaism, Christianity and Islam, coexist in peace and in mutual respect. Yet the medieval forces of radical Islam whom you just saw storming the American embassies throughout the Middle East, well, they oppose this. They seek supremacy over all Muslims. They’re bent on world conquest. They want to destroy Israel, Europe, America. They want to extinguish freedom. They want to end the modern world.

Now, militant Islam has many branches, from the rulers of Iran with their Revolutionary Guards to al-Qaida terrorists to the radical cells lurking in every part of the globe.

But despite their differences, they are all rooted in the same bitter soil of intolerance. That intolerance is directed first to their fellow Muslims and then to Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, secular people, anyone who doesn’t submit to their unforgiving creed. They want to drag humanity back to an age of unquestioning dogma, unrelenting conflict.

I’m sure of one thing. Ultimately, they will fail. Ultimately, light will penetrate the darkness.

Prime Minister Netanyahu used a very simple drawing to show the danger the world now faces regarding the Iranian nuclear program. We can choose to listen now or we can regret later that we closed our ears.

Prime Minister Netanyahu spoke the truth–the question is whether or not anyone heard.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

Putting The Foxes In Charge Of The Henhouse

CNS News is reporting today that Iran has been named to the “bureau” overseeing a month-long United Nations conference in New York aimed at finalizing a controversial global “arms trade treaty.

This is another reason to ask politely that the United Nations get out of New York and America get out of the United Nations.

The article reports:

Furthermore, according to an expert panel monitoring U.N. sanctions on Iran, Tehran continues to flout a Security Council ban on exporting its weaponry, with Syria the main recipient.

“This is like choosing Bernie Madoff to police fraud on the stock market,” said Hillel Neuer, executive director of UN Watch, a non-governmental monitoring group based in Geneva, which drew attention to Iran’s elevation to the conference bureau.

UN Watch is urging U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to condemn the move:

“He should remind the conference that the Security Council has imposed four rounds of sanctions on Iran for refusing to halt its prohibited nuclear program, and that Iran continues to defy the international community through illegal arms shipments to the murderous Assad regime,” Neuer said.

Good grief! The article lists the leadership positions held by Iran in recent years–despite the fact that they are in total violation of the sanctions the U.N. has placed on them. This is the equivalent of punishing a teenager for a speeding ticket by giving them a Porsche.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

Agenda 21 Is Coming To A Neighborhood Near You

The website Democrats Against U. N. Agenda 21 does a wonderful job of explaining what is currently happening with Agenda 21 in America. The website explains exactly how the sovereignty of the United States and the freedom we are accustomed to are being threatened by Agenda 21.

The website reports:

But then you have UN Agenda 21.  What is it?  See our videos and radio shows at the bottom of this page (or search YouTube for Rosa Koire) or buy BEHIND THE GREEN MASK: U.N. Agenda 21 by Rosa Koire click here

Considering its policies are woven into all the General Plans of the cities and counties,  it’s important for people to know where these policies are coming from.  While many people support the United Nations for its peacemaking efforts, hardly anyone knows that they have very specific land use policies that they would like to see implemented in every city, county, state and nation.  The specific plan is called United Nations Agenda 21 Sustainable Development, which has its basis in Communitarianism.  By now, most Americans have heard of sustainable development but are largely unaware of Agenda 21.

Please follow the link to the website to education yourself as to what Agenda 21 is and what is happening to the freedom of those who speak out against it. This is a bi-partisan issue–all of us need to pay attention and get involved.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Why We Need To Leave The United Nations Immediately

English: Emblem of the United Nations. Color i...

Image via Wikipedia

I have written a few articles on Agenda 21. If you use the search engine within this website you will find them. I would like to remind you of a few statements made by those who are in favor of Agenda 21.

“Current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class–involving high meat intake, use of fossil fuels, appliances, home and work air conditioning, and suburban housing–are not sustainable.”  Maurice Strong, Secretary General of the UN’s 1992 Earth Summit

“Land, because of its unique nature and the crucial role it plays in human settlements, cannot be treated as an ordinary asset, controlled by individuals and subject to the pressures and inefficiencies of the market. Private land ownership is also a principle instrument of the accumulation and concentration of wealth and therefore contributes to social injustice; if unchecked, it may become a major obstacle in the planning and implementation of development schemes.”  This is a quote from the 1976 UN Conference on Human Settlement, held in Vancouver, Canada. Under “Section D. Land,” of the Report of Habitat, which came out of the conference. It is from the preamble and speaks of the private ownership of land.

Well, as Ronald Reagan used to say, “There they go again.” Yesterday Fox News posted a story about a United Nations report issued last month.

The article reports:

The report, “21 Issues for the 21st Century,” from the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) Foresight Process, is the culmination of a two-year deliberative process involving 22 core scientists. It is expected to receive considerable attention in the run-up to the Rio+20 United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development, which will be held in Rio, Brazil, in June.

The scientists who wrote the report say it focuses on identifying emerging issues in the global environment, and that it is not about mandating solutions.

But its critics see an agenda lurking in its 60 pages, which call for a complete overhaul of how the world’s food and water are created and distributed — something the report says is “urgently needed” for the human race to keep feeding and hydrating itself safely.

There is no mention of the fact that many of the hunger problems in the world are caused by political situations where tyrannical dictators are in charge. During the time of the food for oil program, run by the United Nations, Saddam Hussein was eating well and building magnificent palaces. The United Nations was up to its neck in corruption is managing the program. Have we not learned from our mistakes? Might I also mention that many of those tyrannical dictators currently sit on the United Nations Human Rights Committee.

My favorite quote from the article (the italics are mine):

“We are not talking about a world government,” said Dr. Oren Young, professor of institutional and international governance and environmental institutions at the University of California at Santa Barbara, and one of the scientists who issued the report.

He said the panel’s conversations included questions like, “How do we resolve these problems without creating this monster entity?”

Young said the panel wasn’t tasked with finding all the answers.

If they weren’t expected to find the answers, why did they meet? How much money did they spend not finding all the answers?
 
More questionable actions by our government:
 

The State Dept. has already weighed in on many of the issues presented by the Foresight Panel in its own statement, titled “Sustainable Development for the Next Twenty Years United States Views on RIO+20.”

Submitted to the U.N by the Bureau of Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific Affairs (OIES) in November, this policy vision makes it clear the State Dept. will back global government solutions — whether they be in addressing the overfishing of the oceans, making national laws and regulations more transparent, addressing land and ocean-based pollution, or water management.

I think it is time to clean house entirely in Washington–elected officials and bureaucrats. Let’s fire everyone and start from scratch.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

Defending The Constitution

December 12, 2011

7:00 pm, at the Northborough Free Library, 34 Main Street

Northborough, MA

 If you have not heard of the United Nation’s “Agenda 21”, you are not alone … 99% of the citizenry are equally in the dark.

Why should we be concerned? There has been a continual, two-decade effort by thousands of “One World Order” advocates to destroy our capitalist system by promoting environmental programs that not only sound plausible, but appear to be absolutely necessary. Under the guise of protecting our planet, these programs have multiple objectives – all intended to redistribute wealth, hand-cuff industry, undermine national sovereignty, restructure the family unit, and take away our property rights.

The public is invited to attend this eye-opening meeting on Monday, December 12th, 7:00 pm, at the Northborough Free Library, 34 Main Street.

Guest speakers Hal Shurtleff, of the John Birch Society and Dave Kopacz, a Municipal Conservation Agent will describe the evolution of U.N. Agenda 21 and its impact on Massachusetts – 37 towns are currently involved, in direct violation of the U.S. Constitution.

According to Cameron Carey of the Northborough Tea Party, “This U.N. directed program, also known as “sustainable development” is truly insidious – it is motivated by the notion that human beings are less important than saving the planet. But as we will discover, that is only the tip of their philosophical iceberg.”

The free admission, public service program is open to residents of Northborough and surrounding towns, the Press, and especially to high school students. It is sponsored by the Northborough Tea Party. Contact: John O’Mara 508.393.2044,

Enhanced by Zemanta

Defending The Constitution

Monday, December 12th, 7:00 pm, at the Northborough Free Library, 34 Main Street.

Northborough, MA – If you have not heard of the United Nation’s “Agenda 21”, you are not alone … 99% of the citizenry are equally in the dark.

Why should we be concerned? There has been a continual, two-decade effort by thousands of “One World Order” advocates to destroy our capitalist system by promoting environmental programs that not only sound plausible, but appear to be absolutely necessary. Under the guise of protecting our planet, these programs have multiple objectives – all intended to redistribute wealth, hand-cuff industry, undermine national sovereignty, restructure the family unit, and take away our property rights.

The public is invited to attend this eye-opening meeting on Monday, December 12th, 7:00 pm, at the Northborough Free Library, 34 Main Street.

Guest speakers Hal Shurtleff, of the John Birch Society and Dave Kopacz, a Municipal Conservation Agent will describe the evolution of U.N. Agenda 21 and its impact on Massachusetts – 37 towns are currently involved, in direct violation of the U.S. Constitution.

According to Cameron Carey of the Northborough Tea Party, “This U.N. directed program, also known as “sustainable development” is truly insidious – it is motivated by the notion that human beings are less important than saving the planet. But as we will discover, that is only the tip of their philosophical iceberg.”

The free admission, public service program is open to residents of Northborough and surrounding towns, the Press, and especially to high school students. It is sponsored by the Northborough Tea Party. Contact: John O’Mara 508.393.2044,

Enhanced by Zemanta

Let’s Unfund The United Nations

CNSNews reported today that UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization) has decided to reappoint Syria to a committee dealing with human rights. The United States declared a funding freeze on UNESCO after they recently admitted  “Palestine” to the agency.

The article reports:

Syrian President Bashar Assad’s regime was recently reappointed to the Committee on Conventions and Recommendations, a subsidiary body of the U.N. Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization’s executive board.

The 29-member committee, which meets twice a year, is tasked to examine often sensitive communications received from individuals or organizations relating to human rights violations within UNESCO’s field of competence – that is, in education, science, culture and communication (including freedom of opinion and expression.)

Other members of the committee in 2010-2011 include Algeria, Belarus, China, Cuba, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Tunisia and Venezuela. Not exactly a group known for its support of civil liberties.

The article also reported:

The U.S. accounts for 22 percent of UNESCO’s operating budget and also makes voluntary contributions. The enforced funding cut saves U.S. taxpayers more than $80 million a year.

The United Nations does not even agree with itself on the issue of Syria. The article reports:

But Syria’s return to the committee is particularly controversial at a time when Damascus is under fire for a violent response to anti-government protests that has killed more than 3,500 people. (A U.N. General Assembly committee on Tuesday passed a draft resolution by a 122-13 vote condemning Assad for the crackdown.)

It really is time for the United States to withdraw itself and its support from the United Nations. The organization began with good intentions, but now has become a place where tyrants rule.

Enhanced by Zemanta

More Shenanigans At The United Nations

Interior of the Church of the Nativity

Image via Wikipedia

Yesterday Fox News reported that the United States will not be contributing to The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) because the organization has accepted the Palestinian mission as a full member.

CBN News reported:

The 107 to 14 vote, with 52 abstentions, easily fulfilled the 81-vote requirement granting full membership status to the P.A. The U.S., Canada and Germany were among the countries voting against the bid, while Russia, China, France, India, South Africa and Brazil were among those voting in favor.

The article at Fox News reports:

Washington is required by law to cut off funding to any U.N. agency if the Palestinian Liberation Organization is granted membership in any group at the international body.

There is more to this story. The Palestinians are seeking to use the United Nations as a vehicle to obtaining a state without making peace with Israel. CBN News reported in February:

The Palestinian Authority has asked the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, or UNESCO, to designate the Church of the Nativity, the Bethlehem church built on the traditional site of Jesus Christ’s birth, as a world heritage site.

“One of the most significant sites of universal importance to humanity is the Old Town of Bethlehem and the birthplace of Jesus,” chief Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erakat said Tuesday in an e-mailed statement. “Palestinians long to share our patrimony with the world.”

No sites under Palestinian Authority control are on the U.N.’s list because Palestinians do not have a state recognized by the U.N. 

At this point I would like to remind everyone about the way Palestinian militants treated the Church of the Nativity when they took it over in 2002. There was a Reuters article on this posted on May 10, 2002, but somehow the link is currently not working. I would also like to remind everyone that when the Arabs controlled the Old City of Jerusalem, Christians and Jews did not have access to their religious sites.

Until the Palestinians recognize the right of Israel to exists, and treat all historical sites in their lands with respect, I see no reason to give them statehood.

 CBN News reported on October 10, 2011:

Taha said UNESCO membership would “allow Palestine to actively participate in protecting cultural heritage in the Palestinian territories,” Reuters reported.

That has not been the case with Joseph’s Tomb, another Jewish holy site, near Shechem, which has been desecrated repeatedly over the years.

Over the weekend, Israeli soldiers preparing the site for Israelis planning to visit during Yom Kippur found swastikas painted on the walls.

In April, a Palestinian policemen opened fire on Israeli passengers driving away from the site, killing Ben Yosef Chai, 24, nephew of Likud Minister Limor Livnat, and wounding four others.

I don’t think the United Nations is ignorant of the history and ideals of the Palestinian Authority–I just think that the United Nations has been taken over by the Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC), which seeks to set up a world-wide caliphate. The countries that truly support freedom and freedom of religion need to leave the United Nations as soon as possible and begin an organization of democracies that support freedom–the United Nations does not currently support freedom.
Enhanced by Zemanta

Do The Rules And Words Of The United Nations Mean Anything ?

United Nations exhibit by OWI at Rockefeller P...

Image by The Library of Congress via Flickr

This week Israeli IDF sergeant Gilad Shalit returned home to Israel five years after being taken hostage by Hamas. Sergeant Shalit was kidnapped inside Israel in a cross-border raid via underground tunnels near the border with Gaza.

In June 1983, the United Nations passed the International Convention Against the Taking of Hostages. The Convention states:

CONSIDERING that the taking of hostages is an offence of grave concern to the international community and that, in accordance with the provisions of this Convention, any person committing an act of hostage taking shall either be prosecuted or extradited,

My questions is simple–“Where was the outrage at the United Nations over the kidnapping of this soldier?” To win his freedom, Israel agreed to release 1,027 Palestinian prisoners, including about 400 with “blood on their hands.” That means they were directly linked to the deaths of Israeli Jews in terrorism attacks. If the United Nations were truly dedicated to peacekeeping, shouldn’t they logically be outraged that there are now at least 400 more terrorists loose in the world? At the present time the Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC), a 56-member group of Islamic nations, is one of the main power blocs in the United Nations. As long as that is the case, the United Nations will not deal with terrorism or brutal dictatorships–in fact, in some cases it will enable and encourage them. It is time the United States took leadership and started a group of peace-loving democracies as a counter-weight to the United Nations. Then, and only then, will there be a world-wide body of nations attempting to work toward peace.


 

Enhanced by Zemanta

This Will Never Happen But It Is A Wonderful Idea

"...they shall beat their swords into plo...

Image via Wikipedia

On Friday CNSNews posted an article about a bill that just passed the House Foreign Relations Committee in the House of Representatives with a vote of 23-15. The bill is the U.N. Transparency, Accountability, and Reform Act (H.R. 2829).  It would force the U.N. to change its funding mechanism from the current system of “assessed” contributions to voluntary ones. In simple terms the bill would allow the United States and other members of the United Nations to fund only those activities and agencies it regards as being efficiently managed, and in the national interest. Obviously, had this law been in effect in the 1990’s, we might have avoided the food for oil scandal. Frankly, what the bill would actually do, other than save taxpayers millions of dollars, would be to defund the United Nations. Considering that the United Nations lost its way a long time ago, I really think that is a great idea. Unfortunately, I am probably not the majority opinion.

The article reports:

In a letter to Ros-Lehtinen [Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.)] on Wednesday, Clinton (Hillary Clinton, Secretary of State) expressed strong opposition to the measure, saying if it reached the president, she would recommend a veto.

Citing U.N. missions in Iraq and Afghanistan as examples, she argued that international engagement through the U.N. comes at a fraction of the cost of acting alone.

“This bill also represents a dangerous retreat from the longstanding, bipartisan focus of the United States on constructive engagement within the United Nations to galvanize collective action to tackle urgent security problems,” she wrote.

“If we act to diminish our global stature, the United States would surrender a key platform from which to shape international priorities, such as obtaining tough sanctions on Iran.”

During the hearing, Ros-Lehtinen referred to Clinton’s letter, and in particular the suggestion that the legislation could harm U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan because other countries would not share the burden by paying for U.N. missions in those countries.

“Does the administration have such little faith in our allies and in our diplomacy – which they pride themselves on –  to think that they would not share the burden of fighting Islamist extremists unless the U.N. forced them to?” she asked.

Has it occurred to anyone that the Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC) is the most powerful bloc in the United Nations and is not going to do anything to significantly limit the actions of radical Islam?

Enhanced by Zemanta