Hilfe & Kontakt

UN's Obsession is Grotesque and Orwellian

Von: Michael Ejercito (mejercit@hotmail.com) [Profil]
Datum: 05.12.2008 16:41
Message-ID: <5ed2f237-09ea-4266-91ba-80bf46c4db6c@q30g2000prq.googlegroups.com>
Newsgroup: alt.revisionismtalk.politics.mideast alt.current-eventssoc.culture.israel soc.culture.jewish
UN's obsession is grotesque and Orwellian

By Jeff Jacoby

THE PRESIDENT of the UN General Assembly, Miguel d'Escoto Brockmann
of Nicaragua, has denounced the policies of a certain Middle Eastern
nation. They are "so similar to the apartheid of an earlier era," he
said, "that the world must unite against them, demanding an "end to
this massive abuse of human rights" and isolating the offending nation
as it once isolated South Africa: with a punishing "campaign of
boycott, divestment, and sanctions."

Of which country was he speaking?

Was it Saudi Arabia, where public facilities are segregated by sex,
and where a pervasive system of gender apartheid denies women the
right to drive, to dress as they choose, to freely marry or divorce,
to vote, to appear in public without a male "guardian," or to give
testimony on an equal basis with men?

Was it Jordan, where the law explicitly bars Jews from citizenship and
where the sale of land to a Jew was for decades not only illegal, but
punishable by death?

Was it Iran, where homosexuality is a capital crime  at least 200
Iranian gays were executed last year - and whose president, Mahmoud
Ahmadinejad, asserted at Columbia University that there are no
homosexuals in Iran?

Was it Sudan, where tens of thousands of black Africans in the
country's southern region, most of them Christians or animists, have
been abducted and sold into slavery by Arab militias backed by the
Islamist regime in Khartoum?

It was none of these. The General Assembly president, a radical
Maryknoll priest who served as Nicaragua's foreign minister during the
Sandinista regime in the 1980s, was not referring to any of the Middle
East's Muslim autocracies and dictatorships, virtually all of which
discriminate against ethnic and religious minorities. He was speaking
of the Jewish state of Israel, the region's lone democracy, and the
only one that guarantees the legal equality of all its citizens - one-
fifth of whom are Muslim and Christian Arabs.

D'Escoto's call for Israel to be shunned as a pariah and strangled
economically came on the UN's Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian
People, an annual occasion devoted to lamenting the rebirth of Jewish
sovereignty in the 20th century, denouncing the national liberation
movement  Zionism - that made that rebirth possible, and championing
the cause of the Palestinian Arabs. The event occurs on or about Nov.
29, the anniversary of the UN vote in 1947 to partition Palestine into
two states, one Jewish and one Arab. There are impassioned speeches,
in which Israel's sins are enumerated and condemned, and the
statelessness of the Palestinians is bewailed. Unmentioned is the fact
that Palestine's Arabs would have had their state 60 years ago had
they and the Arab League not rejected the UN's decision and chosen
instead to declare war on the new Jewish state.

Like so much of what takes place at the UN, the obsession with
demonizing Israel and extolling the Palestinians is grotesque and
Orwellian. More than 1 million Israeli Arabs enjoy civil and political
rights unmatched in the Arab world  yet Israel is accused of
repression and human-rights abuse. Successive Israeli governments have
endorsed a "two-state solution" - yet Israel is blasted as the
obstacle to peace. The Palestinian Authority oversees the vilest
culture of Jew-hatred since the Third Reich, and wants all Jews
expelled from the land it claims for itself - yet Israel is labeled an
"apartheid state" and singled out for condemnation and ostracism.

Make no mistake: In likening Israel to apartheid-era South Africa, the
UN is engaged not in anti-racism but in anti-Semitism. In the 1930s,
the world's foremost anti-Semites demanded a boycott of Jewish
businesses. Today they demand a boycott of the Jewish state.

"No good German is still buying from a Jew," announced Hitler's Nazi
Party in March 1933. "The boycott must be a universal one . . . and
must hit Jewry where it is most vulnerable." Seventy-five years later,
the president of the General Assembly urges the world to throttle
Israel's 6 million Jews with "boycott, divestment, and sanctions."
There is no significant difference between the two cases  or the
animus underlying them.

When the UN adopted its odious "Zionism is racism resolution" in 1975,
US Ambassador Daniel Patrick Moynihan minced no words. "The United
States," he declared, "does not acknowledge, it will not abide by, it
will never acquiesce in this infamous act." Where is such a voice of
moral outrage today?

[ Auf dieses Posting antworten ]