Tag Archives: League of Nations

Isn’t This Racist?

Posted on by

On Wednesday, The Jewish News Syndicate reported that the United Nations General Assembly passed a resolution declaring Israeli presence to be illegal in any area over the 1949 armistice line. That’s interesting. Israel is one of the few countries in the Middle East where Jews, Christians, and Muslims have the same rights and are allowed to participate in the government of the nation. Why is the United Nations picking on the a non-racist country in the area rather than the countries where Jews are not allowed? Why–because there are now enough Muslim countries in the United Nations to begin to take over the organization and to align with the non-Muslim tyrants to attempt to make Sharia Law and Muslim dominance a feature of the United Nations.

The article reports:

More than 40 countries sponsored the resolution, which was the first that Palestinians filed after being granted unprecedented privileges, for a non-U.N. member, earlier this year.

The resolution calls on the Israel Defense Forces to withdraw completely from Judea and Samaria, eastern Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip within 12 months, which means evacuating all Jewish communities beyond the armistice line, including Jerusalem’s Old City.

It also bans arms sales to the IDF of any equipment that would be expected reasonably to be used in the territory over the 1949 lines and calls for a boycott of all products produced by Jews in those areas.

The resolution text lacks any mention of Israeli security concerns, historic ties to the lands or Hamas’s terror attacks in Israel on Oct. 7.

Just for the record, this is the land given to Israel by the Balfour Declaration”

These are the borders for the Jewish state set up by the League of Nations:

The Arabs do not have a legitimate claim to Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria, eastern Jerusalem, or the Gaza Strip. Historically, all of these lands are Jewish and play a major role in both Jewish and Christian history.

The article at the Jewish News Syndicate concludes:

Arsen Ostrovsky and Nadav Steinman, CEO and board chair, respectively, of the International Legal Forum, stated that “today, simply put, the United Nations has become the diplomatic arm of Hamas” and that the resolution “is just the latest in a litany of obscenely one-sided anti-Israel resolutions at the U.N. since Oct. 7.” 

“All it does is reward the murderers, rapists and abductors of Hamas while pouring further fuel on worldwide antisemitism and eroding whatever remaining credibility of the already problematic and politicized International Court of Justice, upon which this resolution is meant to be based,” they added. “Ultimately, peace will only prevail when Hamas is defeated and the hostages are released, not through tiresome antics and pyrrhic Palestinian ‘victories’ at the U.N.”

Giving land to terrorists has never worked in the past. There is no reason to believe that it will work in the future.

Time To Exit The United Nations?  

Posted on by

Author:  R. Alan Harrop, Ph.D    

The United Nations (UN) was formed in 1945 right after the end of World War II.  Like the League of Nations formed after World War I, it was hoped that the UN would foster global peace among nations.  It is time to assess whether the UN has achieved that objective and whether our participation in it is beneficial to our country.  There have been many wars since the creation of the UN such as the Korean War, Vietnam War, Israeli Six Day War, Iraq War and currently Russia/Ukraine and the Israel/Hamas conflict.  

One might argue that the presence of the UN has prevented a nuclear World War III, but that would be a stretch to say the least. The threat of mutual destruction has been the controlling factor in preventing nuclear war thus far.  Whether that will continue with the spread of nuclear weapons to China, India, Pakistan, North Korea and inevitably Iran remains to be seen. The existence of the UN does not seem to have prevented nuclear proliferation.   

Is membership in the UN beneficial for the United States? The UN started with 51 countries and now has 189. The majority of these countries are not democratic and their values and principles are not consistent with our constitution.  Worse still, the structure of the UN General Assembly gives every country one vote with the weight of the smallest country (Tuvala, population 12,000) carrying the same impact of the United States.  Currently, the United States pays up to 25% of the UN annual budget of about $4 billion which amounts to $1 billion a year.  Money that could be spent on securing our borders, for example.  

Some other areas of concern are the leftist leaning decisions of the UN.  The World Health Organization arm of the UN mishandled the COVID 19 pandemic and failed to hold China in anyway responsible for the creation and spreading of the manmade virus. The UN’s unwavering support of the climate change extremist’s agenda, such as the Paris Accords, and the war against fossil fuels threatens our country and way of life, while allowing China and India to continue to build coal burning power plants.   Another example, is the UN’s failure to condemn the barbaric atrocities of Hamas for almost two months and their history of condemning Israel at the slightest excuse. They have never condemned Iran, the biggest sponsor of terror in the world.  The latest example is UNESCO’s (UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization) global wide guidelines that would severely restrict free speech in the media and social platforms. The guidelines require the blocking of any speech that they label as “misinformation.”  Sound familiar?  They also boldly stated that the U.S. Constitution needs to be changed to reflect these new guidelines. 

  It is time to have a serious debate as to whether we want to turn over the governance of our country to some global authority.  Some of the leftists in this country believe we should.  I do not and hope neither do you. With China increasingly controlling the UN by placing members of their communist party in key positions, we must make an honest evaluation of whether the UN has outlived its usefulness. 

The History Explains A Lot

Posted on by

Obviously there will be a lot of refugees from the war in the Gaza Strip. The infrastructure has been destroyed and peoples’ homes have been destroyed. So why are the other Arab nations in the area unwilling to take in the Palestinian refugees?  The history of the refugees explains a lot. Understand that the refugee problem began in 1948 when Arabs who were living peacefully in Israel were told that if they left their homes to fight Israel they would get their land back plus land owned by the Jews who would be ‘driven into the sea.’ Well, it didn’t work out that way. The refugee problem was further exacerbated in 1967 when Israel reclaimed more of the land it had been promised in agreements with the League of Nations.

On Sunday, Townhall posted an article that explains some of the reasons the neighboring Arab countries are unwilling to take in the refugees from the Gaza Strip.

The article notes:

As the Left rages against Israel, hurling antisemitic slurs and chanting for more Jews to die, some might want to consider why the civilians have nowhere to go. Okay, maybe these folks do know but don’t care, but liberals are historically illiterate, so who knows? It goes beyond geography. The Palestinians bring trouble and have a long, sordid history of fomenting mayhem and terrorism in other Arab nations. 

…Egypt is the logical destination for these Palestinians, but Cairo doesn’t want them, and for good reason: terrorism. The border crossing at Rafah remains closed, with tanks now deployed to ensure their border is secure. Egypt’s prime minister even said his country is willing to sacrifice millions to ensure no Palestinians ever enter Egypt en masse (via WSJ):

The article concludes:

If Hamas and the Palestinians aren’t freely moving into Egypt, they’ll be okay with it. Also, Israel has resisted ceasefires and has continued to chip away at the terror group’s infrastructure in Gaza, but a humanitarian crisis could still emerge. 

As the tweet above mentioned, the Palestinians tried to take over Jordan in the 1970s, leading to the late King Hussein declaring war on them and driving them out. They were booted from Kuwait after collaborating with Saddam Hussein’s forces before the Gulf War. They set off a powder keg in Lebanon, a nation that has yet to recover from its brutal civil war that lasted 15 years. No Arab country wants these people because they bring instability and trouble. They’re not importing terrorism; that’s what we’re doing wholesale.

What country wants to import a bunch of dedicated terrorists?

Know Your History

Posted on by

In 1918, the Ottoman Empire fell in 1918. It was a caliphate. The caliphate was abolished on March 3, 1924 (since the early 16th century, the Ottoman sultans had laid claim to the title of caliph of the Muslims). From February to June 1926 the Swiss civil code, the Italian penal code, and the German commercial code were adopted wholesale. As a result, women’s emancipation was strengthened by the abolition of polygamy, marriage was made a civil contract, and divorce was recognized as a civil action.  Mustafa Kemal Ataturk was the great leader of the National War of Independence who pioneered the revolutions and reforms that founded modern Turkey. In response to Turkey becoming a secular country, in1928 Hassan al Banna founded the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. The purpose of the Muslim Brotherhood was to create a new caliphate by bringing all lands to the Caliph’s rule pursuant to shariah. When the Ottoman Empire was carved up after World War I, maps were drawn with little regard for ethnic groups or past history. That is part of the root of today’s Middle East wars.

During the First World War (in 1917), the British issued The Balfour Declaration, a public statement announcing its support for the establishment of a “national home for the Jewish people” in Palestine, then an Ottoman region with a small minority Jewish population. Three years later, the League of Nations codified the boundaries set forth in the Balfour Declaration. (The name Palestine had been given to the region after the Romans conquered the Jews in 70 A.D. as an insult to the Jews. There was never a country of Palestine.) In 1919, a formal agreement on the  mandated Jewish homeland was signed in London. The agreement was signed by Emir Feisal ibn-Hussien, representing and acting on behalf of the Arab Kingdom of Hedjaz, and Chaim Weitzman, representing and acting on behalf of the Zionist Organization. The  boundaries of this land included all of Israel (including Gaza, Samaria, West Bank, etc.) and what is now Transjordan. It is telling that Emir Feisal had written a letter agreeing to exactly what the land division was and pledged that he and the Arab states would carry out this agreement. Jordan was supposed to be the modern Palestinian state. Unfortunately, in 1920, Britain began limiting the immigration of Jews into the Jewish state while the Arabs were freely allowed to immigrate. That was a major part of the tensions that would ensue when Israel became a nation.

There is much more to this history–Jordan became the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan. Jordan had originally been part of the land promised for the Jewish nation, but Thomas Edward Lawrence (Lawrence of Arabia) made some promises to the Arabs in exchange for their support against the Turks. For a time, ‘Palestinian’ refugees were allowed to live in Jordan, but they were kicked out after they attempted to overthrow the government. To put it simply, there is enough Arab land to settle the ‘Palestinians’ anywhere in Arab land, but the Arabs do not want them. They are useful as a political tool to be used to ‘drive Israel into the sea,’ but they are an unruly people who tend to be violent.

That is a brief look into the background to the current mess in the Middle East.

Where Are We Now?

Posted on by

Today is the anniversary of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. We need to remember the families who were impacted by that attack and look at what we can learn from that attack.

Between 1940 and 1941, the American military had increased from 458,365 Army, Navy, and Marines to 1,801,101 (these figures are from the National WWII Museum Website). What was going on in the world? The Japanese seized Manchuria in 1931. Japan withdrew from the League of Nations in March 1933. In October 1933, Hitler withdrew from the League of Nations. In March 1935, he denounced the armament limits placed on Germany by the Treaty of Versailles and began rebuilding the German armed forces. The world was clearly becoming a very dangerous place, and America sought to remain uninvolved (although it was beginning to rearm). In researching this article I came across a few articles that stated that President Roosevelt knew about the attack on Pearl Harbor ahead of time and chose to remain silent in order to bring America into the war. I have no opinion on that.

PearlHarbor

Today, America is still striving for peace. We are currently a war-weary nation, but unfortunately, the world around us is not a peaceful place. The lesson we need to learn from Pearl Harbor is that aggression in other parts of the world can easily spill over to America. This is not the time to be considering cutting the defense budget–it is a time to increase our military strength in order to keep America safe.