Posted by: theoptimisticconservative | October 31, 2011

UNESCO admits Palestinian State to full membership; decision point for US *UPDATE* Decision made?

We’ve made the threat.  Now it’s time to make good on it.

The Palestinian Arab campaign to unilaterally declare statehood has been pushing for over a month for full membership in UNESCO, the UN Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization.  Seeking membership in collateral organizations, where the US can’t exercise a Perm-5 veto, is a method of generating momentum for de facto recognition of statehood.  As pointed out by many, in numerous forums, the unilateral campaign being prosecuted by the Palestinian Authority (PA, led by Mahmoud Abbas) circumvents the negotiation process with Israel.  In doing that, it violate the Oslo Accords and invalidates everything both sides have agreed to in the years since.

In early October, Secretary Hillary Clinton lambasted the decision by UNESCO to allow a vote on the question – a vote that has just been held, in spite of strong US objections.  According to Fox News (emphasis added):

Former U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. John Bolton said the vote signals weakness in U.S. diplomacy.

“So ineffective was Obama administration diplomacy, that France voted in favor of Palestinian membership, and Britain and Japan abstained. U.S. statutes, dating from 1990, now require a full cutoff of U.S. funding, which Congress should insist occur immediately. Should the administration seek changes in the applicable statutory provisions that would eliminate or weaken the funding cutoff, Congress should reject them,” Bolton said.

Fox quotes Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL), chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, as determined to cut off funding in accordance with US law.

But the Obama administration may or may not take summary action.  The federal executive is not necessarily committing a prosecutable or impeachable offense by failing to observe the restrictions put on funds by Congress or by previous administrations.  Certainly, many Americans – probably a majority – would consider it wrong, and even disgusting, for the Obama administration to not make good on the funding threat, given the outright provocation and the irresponsible, confrontational stance of the PA.  But it is not clear what Congress can do to withhold the funds if the president decides to allocate them to UNESCO anyway.  The threat of budgetary retaliation is cleanly usable only when there is an expectation that there will be an official federal budget, voted on and signed.  There are ample reasons to suspect we will not have another one until after Obama leaves office.

We can hope Obama will act in accordance with longstanding US law.  That Mahmoud Abbas intends his statehood campaign to bypass the need for binding agreements with Israel has been made crystal clear, most recently in a 23 October interview translated by MEMRI.  Of recognizing the Jewish state of Israel, one of Israel’s requirements, he had this to say (emphasis added):

Mahmoud Abbas: “First of all, let me make something clear about the story of the ‘Jewish state.’

“They started talking to me about the ‘Jewish state’ only two years ago, discussing it with me at every opportunity, every forum I went to – Jewish or non-Jewish – asking: ‘What do you think about the “Jewish state”?’ I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again: I will never recognize the Jewishness of the state, or a ‘Jewish state.’” [...]

 Abbas also endorsed the kidnapping of Israel soldier Gilad Shalit as “a good thing”:

Interviewer:Don’t you think that it was the resistance that managed to liberate a thousand prisoners?

“Negotiations must always be accompanied by a measure of force. There can be no negotiations without resistance. This has been shown by the experience of people – in Ireland and all countries.”

Mahmoud Abbas: “That’s true, but our circumstances are different. We are not able to wage military resistance.

“Hamas kidnapped – or rather, captured – a soldier, and managed to keep him for five years, and that is a good thing.

“We don’t deny it. On the contrary, it’s a good thing that on a small strip of land, 40 × 7 kilometers, they were able to keep him and hide him.” [...]

Fatah (Abbas’ party) and Hamas made much of their rapprochement and the unity of their parties as representatives of a “Palestinian State” earlier this year.  Rather than repudiating Hamas and its terrorist acts, Abbas continues – in Arabic language media – to embrace them.  (Although blogger Challah Hu Akbar no longer posts regularly, you can check his blog for daily updates to the number of rockets fired by Hamas at Israel. There have been 53 so far in October.)

An organization of the UN has, over the strenuous objections of the United States, endorsed terrorism and the campaign plan of a PA leader who is determined to gain statehood without negotiating in good faith with Israel.  Time for the US to do what we said we’d do.

*UPDATE* According to Voice of America and Fox, the State Department has announced that the next disbursement to UNESCO, $60 million due in November, will not be made.  The DOS spokeswoman said the administration would consult with Congress on how to move forward, pointing out that US membership in UNESCO could be challenged based on non-payment.  This will bear watching.

J.E. Dyer’s articles have appeared at Hot Air’s Green Room, Commentary’s “contentions,Patheos, and The Weekly Standard online.

About these ads

Responses

  1. Madam:

    “We can hope Obama will act in accordance with longstanding US law.”

    Why? I mean, what gives us that hope? Is it Obama’s past attitudes, his current or past demonstrable willingness to recognize the authority of Congress? His brave defense of Israel’s or America’s best interests in the region? What…?

    Obama, our Agitator-in-chief, is an Internationalist and as such he will find ways, supported by a few cow manure like speeches, to continue to support UNESCO, the UN, the Palestinians and any other international entity that might help him destroy the American culture and its traditional values.

    rafa

  2. Jewish historical sites will be denide by UN

    • Yup, FOOTSIE, the Israeli claim to Gyrmyzy Gasaba, Taht al-Takia, and the Ancient Temple of Grossinger are now all verkakte.

    • Actually, FOOTSIE, you have a good point. UNESCO is the forum in which to lodge claims like “Rachel’s tomb is not a Jewish site but actually a site holy to Muslims.” (A claim made not only by West Bank Arabs but by Recep Tayyip Erdogan.)

      UNESCO is a forum for the PA to advance the false narrative of “Palestinian” history, using the UN recognition of what that narrative says about various historical sites.

      • Given the fact that both of these Abrahamaic religions share many of the same prophets, and that religious sites have layered histories, it isn’t surprising that each side would have both contrary and duplicate claims. However, it is only one of these peoples who are having their homes bulldozed on the pretext of “preserving” a historical narrative which is exclusive of the narrative of the other.

        This land has been occupied by semitic peoples from time immemorial. Some are Jews, some Christians and others are Moslems. Many of the Christians and Moslems in Greater Palestine will have had Jewish ancestors who converted. So what? I’m an American. I believe that everyone is entitled to have their person and property equally protected by the same law, irrespective of race or creed. As a Christian I also believe that all are equal in the sight of God, and don’t have much time for the fundamentalists who say that Jews and Moslems are damned, or that any of us are chosen above any others, or that anyone is exempted from the commandments “thou shalt not steal”, and “thou shalt not kill”. I reject the blasphemous premise of the settler-robber and suicide-bomber that God exempted them from these commandments.

  3. Follow the “law”? Wow, I sure hope that you are being facetious because the Obummer Regime doesn’t feel particularly obliged to follow any particular law, especially a law that would damage the “brand”.

    I don’t look for the Regime to do much of anything. They’ll sake some neeners in the direction of Turtle Bay, speechify some, and then figure out a way to get around any restrictions… for the good of the children.

    r/TMF

  4. darn tootin it’s weakness…..if Bolton was still running things he would carpet bombed UN HQ

    and since the French dared to cast their own vote as if they had a right to do just that,he would do the same to NATO HQ in Brussels.

    Queen E of course only has been waiting to slitch-bap Obama over the chintzy IPod….all on O.

    and them Japanese seem in need of special attention from Officer Bolton..

    Johnny go all we did it before and we can do it again….. Hohoho, mon amour.

    —–

    Bolton KNOWS diplomacy.

    • fuster:

      “…he would carpet bombed UN HQ…”

      Which would go to show you his profound understanding of the problem and, also, the best possible solution to it.

      rafa

  5. the 1993 Oslo Accords implicitly provided for the cessation of settlement expansion. It explicitly provided that the border between the future Palestinian State and Israel would be based on the 1967 line.

    Israel ignored the first of these conditions from day one (Although initially the pace of settlement expansion slowed). In contravention of Oslo, Israel has continued to forceably expropriate the public and private property of non-Jews in the West Bank and east Jerusalem, either by direct state action, or by assisting or conniving at the actions of Jewish settlers. The expropriations preceded the Intifada, and continue to this day. The Knesset is currently consideration legislation which would “legalize” even those few settlements which are illegal under Israeli law. Presumably, this is to avoid the embarassment of the military authorities ignoring inconvenient Israeli law. It amply illustrates the real Israeli attitude towards Oslo.

    It also appears, that having always acknowledged the 1967 line as the basis of the territorial divide, and Oslo having explicitly provided for a division based on 1967, the present Netanyahu government has repudiated this too.

    So much for JED’s protestations about Palestinian membership of UNESCO being in breach of Oslo. In fact Oslo make no mention, explicitly or implicitly, about Palestinian membership of international bodies.

    UNESCO is a body which was set up to realize the cultural and educational objectives which our nation recognizes are the entitlement of all peoples. Obviously, the Israeli policy of demolishing schools, closing universities, and preventing non-Jews in Israel and the Occupied Territories who take up graduate and post-graduate opportunities abroad from returning to their homes, has frequently brought Israel into conflict with UNESCO. That is the real issue for Israel. The Palestinians will now have a direct voice at the UNESCO table. And that is what the Israeli opposition to the Palestinians having any international voice is all about – leaving the Palestinians powerless and without legal recourse while their dispossession continues unabated.

    Why we in the US, which normally upholds property rights, self-determination of peoples, and the values underpinning UNESCO, should further sully our international reputation by pulling out of UNESCO, completely mystifies me.
    In order to appease this out of control ethnocracy, Israel, an outfit that tramples over every self-evident truth enshrined in our Constitution, we are now about to shoot ourselves in both feet. In addition to appearing as world-class hypocrites by welcoming the Arab Spring while at the same time co-operating with Israeli obstruction of Palestinian independence, we are now likely to see the UNESCO programmes which the US holds dear being cut. I have no doubt that our enemies will be highlightling the reason why.

    The remark about the French supporting Palestinian membership of UNESCO is priceless. The contextual implication is that the French wouldn’t have done this if someone other than Obama was in power. This couldn’t be the same French who thumbed their noses at Bush when the latter was lying our way into the catastrophy of Iraq? (Pity we didn’t take heed of their warnings!). By the way, our best ally in the world, Britain, couldn’t be persuaded to oppose the UNESCO vote. It is not Obama but the Israelophiles in Congress who are undermining the US, and leaving us internationally isolated.

    Unless you believe in the rediculous proposition that US influence is dependent upon beating people over the head with military threats, and that foreigners who don’t do as they are told can be bombed or invaded, withdrawing from UNESCO to inconvenient a foreign power that has never obliged or assisted our country – even while we doled it out to the annual cost of billions of US tax-dollars – will be another disaster for immediate and long-term US interests.

    We have never had the ability to dictate to the world. Even in the short period of nuclear hegemony betweet 1945 and 1948 US influence and power has always been primarily economic and moral. The Congressional Israelophiles (and the Bush economic crash) are destroying that influence.
    I wouldn’t so mind if we were taking this damage in pursuit of our own interests. But for a foreign power…….?

  6. They admitted the Palestinians to UNESCO because of their enormous contributions to education, science and culture, which include . . . ahhhh . . . ummmm. Let me get back to you on that.

    UNESCO is another UN joke agency supported primarily by the US. For Example, Libya was elected to the UN Human Rights Council in 2010. In 2011 we found it necessary to depose the Ghaddafi regime because of its long history of human rights violations. While farce can be entertaining, I don’t see the need to spend millions of dollars to produce the farcical show at the UN.

    • ” They admitted the Palestinians to UNESCO because of their enormous contributions to education, science and culture…”

      either that or because it makes the US look sorta silly withholding funding from UNESCO as these no direct harm in admitting the Pals to membership there.

      and as we’ve got the real deal admission to the General Assembly blocked, to the displeasure of mostly everyone in general and specifically all of those that we rallied to aid us in that SIGNIFICANT effort(including everyone that the petulant and primitive Officer Bolton listed in his attempt to blame the Obama admin for not “handling” in this instance), this was a decent tactic for the Pals and for everyone who thinks that Israel needs to give up the occupation

  7. Paulite, the Oslo Accords called for steps from the Palestinians including cessation of attacks and certain forms of propaganda. These did not happen. When one side breaks an accord, the accord is no longer binding on the other side.

    • Margo, I agree. However, the Israelis never commenced complying with their Oslo obligations and the Palestinians were left watching with their hands tied while the land-grab continued. In such circumstances, you can hardly expect the Palestinians not to resist when their land, water, and homes continued to be stolen from them. The intifada itself didn’t start for several years after the Oslo.

      But this isn’t the real point I was making. I was pointing out the absolute lack of insight or irony displayed by JED when she advocated that the Palestinians be punished, and the US damage its own interests and influence, in relation to an imaginary breach of a treaty which the Israelis have cynically flouted from its inception. There is nothing in Oslo which precludes the Palestinians from joining international organizations. In fact, it is the Israeli disregard of Oslo which has prompted the Palestinians to seek other means of gaining legal protection for their property and other rights. These rights are the very same rights that you and I take for granted, and which the law of the United States and its states upholds and protects. The Israelis are concerned that Palestinian recognition will give the Palestinians as individuals and as a people some sort of legal protection against the robbery of their homes, water, and farmland. Why should they be denied something you and I and the Constitution hold self-evident? Or are the Palestinians untermenschen, and not entitled to these things?

    • good comment Margo….and don’t let anyone tell you that there was as much or more cynicism on the Israeli side in signing and failing to follow the provisions of the agreement.

    • “certain sorts of propaganda”

      Are you referring to the poisonous stuff preached by extremist Rabbis in settler Yeshivas? (You know, the deranged loonbins who exhort their followers to burn the crops and poison the water of their Palestinian neighbours, and who preach that the Palestinians have no right to their homes, land, and water in the West Bank)

  8. Regarding the PA’s intention to leverage UNESCO for control over Jewish historical sites…. here you go:

    http://www.smh.com.au/world/west-bank-religious-sites-first-for-world-heritage-request-20111101-1mtza.html#ixzz1cSwSBeaw

    First thing out of the gate.

    • There is nothing whatsoever in the report you have referred to (In the Sydney Morning Herald) to suggest anything other than (as is posited by the reporter) it might lead to the Palestinians seeking World Heritage protection for Moslem holy sites in the West Bank.
      The fact is that it is only Moslems and Christians who are having their homes stolen and bulldozed in an attempt to assert cultural exclusivity and erase the cultural narrative of non-Jews in Jerusalem and the West Bank.

  9. So? Jewish religious sites outside of Israel don’t belong to Israel and why would Israel object to having those sites be recognized and protected?

  10. So we should withhold the $60 million payment to UNESCO? How about we withhold every UN payment? Forever. I’d love to see the US not give another nickel to that wretched organization and then watch it collapse without US financial or political support.

    I’d be happy to see another organization sprout up that unabashedly supports individual liberties across the world. A “League of Democracies” or something along those lines. A LOD could perhaps fund the few current UN programs that are actually worthwhile. However, let’s do the planet a favor and terminate the UN. Despite the intentions of those who created it, it’s insidious.

    • “we’re taking our football and going home. won’t play with you any more.”

      about time, too. why should we be bothered being the most influential and powerful member of the UN when it doesn’t do what we want 100% of the time.

      sure, the UN is extremely useful and serves our interests more than three-quarters of the time. sure we have a veto over anything important.
      sure the IAEA reports to the Security Council about Iran’s non-compliance and nuclear weapons program have been vital to rallying support for demonizing Iran and imposing sanctions.
      sure the next report is on the way and is going to be extremely important to us.

      • fuster:

        “the UN is extremely useful and serves our interests more than three-quarters of the time”

        You count…?

        “sure we have a veto over anything important.”

        No. Actually, we have a veto over anything, important or not. So does Cummunist China, Russia, France and our other “peers”.

        “sure the IAEA reports to the Security Council about Iran’s non-compliance and nuclear weapons program have been vital to rallying support for demonizing Iran and imposing sanctions.”

        A lot of good that has done us. The IAEA is a joke and sanctions do nothing to deter Iran. Iran gets all the support it needs from Russia, China and France, the orther members of your admired and beloved Security Council.

        So much for all that nonsense…

        rafa

        • Iran gets all the support it needs from Russia, China and France,—-

          nah…..nah……nah……..Iran WAS getting support, but by having to vote, in public, about Iran, Russia has been peeled away and China is peeling, pulling out of deals (quite lucrative and advantageous deals) to finance further Iranian oil development….

          something that they’re doing because it’s too risky to expect long-term returns from a government that’s not likely to endure

          FRANCE????? a friend of Iran ?

    • Sounds good to me.

      A majority of the 25 or so genuine democracies in the world voted to extend full membership of UNESCO to the Palestinians.

    • Ritchie Emmons:

      “A “League of Democracies” or something along those lines.”

      You mean a bunch of socialist countries getting together to tell the world how to operate and act?

      rafa

      • rafa, No. I mean an organization that is made up only of countries that have a certain degree of (political) liberty for their citizens (as deemed by Freedom House, or some similar group). Countries like Russia would fall below the threshold – it’d only be for the true democracies/republics. This organization would promote individual liberty all over the world. For example, it’s mandate would be to unashamedly give rhetorical and material support to anyone who is fighting against an oppressive or abusive government and any democratic country who is under threat from a non-Democratic state (think Georgia/Russia or Taiwan/China).

        Naturally, judgments would have to be made that took into account the wisdom of providing such support (like with the Arab Spring). And of course, cost/benefit analysis would have to be taken into account as well. But in short, this LOD’s central function would be to expand individual liberty as much as it possibly can be spread.

        fuster, why should we bother with being the “most influential” member of the UN? Especially when it doesn’t do what we want 100% of the time? Why don’t we ditch it and do what we want rather than prostrating ourselves to an organization where our wishes are beholden to other countries that most assuredly do not have our best interests in mind?

        Worse than all that though is the legitimacy that the UN gives to the most despicable of regimes. Any tin pot thug dictator loves having his country be a part of the same world organization as the US. It gives that thug a legitimacy that he otherwise would never receive. It also gives them a degree of influence over US desires. No such country should ever be handed such influence. Better to wash our hands of that dreadful organization and watch it rot.

        • R.E.:

          True Republics (like we once were)? Then YES. Democracies like the modern ones ones in Europe and the Americas? Then NO. There isn’t one single democracies going on today that is not a socialist state to one degree or another. The lesser developed socialist democracies, ironically, are stepping up their pace to catch up to the abject failures of the other socialist democracies that preceeded them. Like lemmings rushing to the edge of the cliff.

          Funny if it weren’t so tragic.

          Not that your expectations are not terrific and great, mind you. It’s just that it never quite works the way the charmers taught us to expect them to. Why, just look around you for the perfect example. There are certainly plenty of them to choose from…

          rafa

        • Richie,

          The genuine stable established democracies – (The ones who observe the rule of law, protect and respect private property, enshrine the same individual rights in their laws as we do):

          The United States,
          Canada,
          Iceland,
          Norway,
          Switzerland,
          The nations of the EU (except Romania, Bulgaria and Estonia).
          Australia,
          New Zealand,
          Japan,
          Korea,
          (There are a few countries in South and Central America may settle down to become true democracies once the shadow of the military fades, and Taiwan, Turkey, Romania and Bulgaria are knocking on the door, as is South Africa. India is often called the world’s biggest democracy, but in reality 10% of the population are indentured slaves, and for most of the population the rule of law is a mere theory)

          The nations which most resemble us are: Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Ireland, and Great Britain. They are all english-speaking, and their laws are based on the English common-law.

          About 35 in all.

          • Ritchie:

            And, besides the language similarities (which don’t amount to much), all these countries are socialisms. In fact, name me one democracy that isn’t either listing heavily towards socialism or that isn’t already there.

            Better still, name me one democracy that isn’t already marching tightly in the socialist ranks.

            Resemble us indeed! Why, we can’t seem to wait until we become more and more likeTHEM!

            And here is an interesting exercise for you. Why do you think that most card carrying socialists and all internationalists to a man love to promote democracy over any other form of government? Why do you think that they can’t wait to make the world into a humungous voting booth?

            No, it’s not patriotism or love of freedom. Fact is, no one here is naive enough to believe that anyone can actually be totally free in any complex modern society. No, it’s also not that they share the attitudes and dreams of our founding fathers because God knows that they work hard and are fully committed to destroying everything they created and deeded to us. No, it’s not any of that Kumbaya, lofty stuff. They love to endorse, pray and promote the democratic smoke screen because it is the easiest way for them to get onto the driver’s seat and, therefore, control the bee hive.

            And, why do I say that? Simple. Democracy, Federal Democracies, democracies like we have been turned into, indeed like we have already become, depend on numbers. The populace, the voters are easy to buy, entice and/or cajole with the swan’s song of more and more largess, more and more entitlements and more and more freebies. And, if that doesn’t work well or fast enough, they are easy prey to any charmer that tickles the trigger of class envy, greed and just about every other weakness built into man. Look at both the democrats and republicans during the whole spending debate. It’s “like watching two old drunks argue about an overdue bar bill. Aboard the Titanic…” and then please tell me, what’s the real third rail of politics…?

            Beware your love of democracies for democracy’s sake.

            rafa

            • “Beware your love of democracies for democracy’s sake.”

              rafa, I am quite aware of the potential pitfalls you cite. That’s why I suggest such an organization be one that promotes LIBERTY – not necessarily just “democracy.” If I were forming it, I’d have a high bar to qualify for entry and immediate dismissal if a country fell beneath that bar (as decided by an annual assessment by an unaligned entity – or something along those lines). If those socialist countries dip below the bar because they can’t contain their socialist impulses and restrict the liberty of their citizens, then so be it. Hope you can right the ship and maybe we’ll let you rejoin the club next year.

              But aside from all this, I’d love to see such an organization be a counterweight and a shameful and embarrassing reminder to all those other states across the world that practice the oppression of their respective citizens.

              • I share your wishes. However…there isn’t one single country, much less any of the world’s democracies that would actually fit the mold if the scrutiny is close and detailed.

                Unless…

                You are willing and ready to become supine enough to accept a high level of taxation, entitlements at the expense of others used as a tool to blatantly get more votes, constrictions in your freedom to voice your religious preferences and to practice them freely and publicly, restrictions on the usage of your property and the vulnerability that comes from possible government take-over, restrictions in your ability to defend yourself and your family, intrusive and often offensive restrictions on environmental matters, business regulations, government force in the conduct of private business, etc.

                You see, what I’m trying to say is that liberty, no, not liberty, the undermining and/or lack thereof, is nothing more than a sliding scale. Some easily accept thirty points on the sliding scale; others would grudgingly accept fifty points on the same scale while others would clamor for a sixty or seventy point reading on the sliding scale. It’s all a matter of perspective, self-interest and opinion. This scale is movable, of course, mostly by government and its charmers and professional political prestidigitators, but, in the end, it is precisely that particular peculiarity, the eminently movable sliding scale of liberty, what democracies and other forms of so-called “self governments” use to promote, not the welfare of the citizen or the strengthening of the nation but the guarantee for themselves of more and more power.

                Because power, by the way, also comes with a sliding scale… Put these two sliding scales next to each other, the scale of liberty and the scale of power, particularly government power, and use your imagination…

                In the meantime…keep your dreams…

                rafa

  11. 1. I am uneasy to agree with Fustr on so many points. I have to sit down.
    2. To re-re-re-repeat concerning the Palestinians: The folks that “govern and represent” don’t seem to be doing a very good job. If the “Palestinian Leaders” didn’t have a self-subjugated class of people to drag out in front of TV cameras for suckers like Paul, what would they do for a living?
    3. Let assume for a moment the Jews leave Israel and go live at Pauls’ place. How long would it take the gleeful Arabs to destroy every building, business, research center, hospital, etc. because the were built and perfectly maintained by Jews.
    They would take 21st century civilized infrastructure and turn it into a backward dump, while lobbing rockets and planting bombs for some other “valid” reason.
    The Arabs are the Hillbillys of the world. Actually, they give good Hillbillys a bad name.
    When the oil money is gone, a few Sheiks will live well. The rest of the Arab world will rightfully return to dust. They will speak of how great their culture was 1000 years ago.
    They, of course, will have pics of Paul in their tents next to the goat carcasses they sacrificed for something.
    The Jews will have turned Pauls’ place into a thriving, wealthy, cultured, metropolis.
    The Arabs will hate them for their success.

    • Now, as a little experiment you should substitute the word Jew for the word Arab, and visa versa wherever they appear in your diatribe. The result would be a dead-ringer for an excerpt from Mein Kampf. You know the sort of thing: “the foul and unwashed Jew who pollutes civilization”

      Yes, it seems that anti-semitism never went away. It merely switched its focus from the semitic Jews to the semitic Arabs. This is no co-incidence. After all it was the right-wing and its media (viz: Hearst/Murdock) that led the charge of anti-semitism in the 1930s and 1950s and which branded the entire Jewish race as communists.

      • How about we substitute Mr. Potatohead for arab. I notice you don’t dispute the assertions there Paul. Just pre-canned cherry picked gobbledy goop.
        Wheres the beef Paul? All belief and feeling from the herd and nothing but droppings left for your effort.
        You are quite trendy though.

        • Wreed: Pay no mind.

          Now…I’m not really talking about Paulite here, you understand (I wouldn’t do THAT), but, while its fun to fence with “these guys”, we also have to keep reminding ourselves that their programming is both predictable and ruthlessly adhered to. For instance, they actually believe, with religious-like fervor and political zealotry, that when they label something with some sort of recognizable nastiness that something magically turns into the very same label that they have chosen for it.

          Of course, this idiocy is not at all anything like us. We simply describe what’s in front of us by its proper name and attributes; all in the interest of accuracy. Stuff like “illegal aliens”, “Muslim extremists”, “stupid socialists” and such are exact definitions and describe the subject perfectly. That they hate those definitions demonstrates this point 100%.

          By the way, that weird insistence by the left to be inaccurately nasty is our own fault because we are often way too concerned with what “these guys” think of our opinion to notice how they always bend over backwards to find our concepts a description that encompasses their guttural dislike for them and we fail to realize that, no matter what we do, say or think, it is our logical stance against their ideology that rules their every thought and their every emotion.

          Which is OK I guess because I dislike the bums every bit as much as they dislike me.

          Well, so much for unity, inclusiveness, bipartisanship and all that other politically contrived cow manure… 

          rafa

  12. Imagine, if we didn’t have UNESCO, something like this would happen:

    http://www.theblaze.com/stories/vandals-spray-paint-swastikas-graffiti-on-josephs-tomb-in-israel/

    • miggs, you’re linking to a site quoting The Jewish Week—-

      why don’t you try looking at the original ?

      http://www.thejewishweek.com/news/breaking_news/josephs_tomb_vandalized_swastikas?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheJewishWeekHeadlineNewsFeed+%28The+Jewish+Week+Headline+News+Feed%29

      it a short piece and worth reading to the final sentence.

      • Good point, fuster. Now then, since we are picking the nit, read the penultimate paragraph too. Out loud, please…

        rafa

    • Miguel Cervantes: You do realize that the liberal left, the socialists and the internationalists among us (did I just repeat myself…?) have first dibs on the use of “Nazi” to define a particular foe. By their definition a Nazi is anyone who disagrees with and/or openly opposes their drive to socialize and de-culturalize the Western world. That’s it; nobody else can carry that particular definition. The only known exceptions to that strict nomenclature rule are the rabid anti-communists and, often, Jews and Christians. They can be deemed Nazis too.

      But, not to worry, there are fewer anti-communists every day now; what with “communism being dead” and all…

      By the way, how is Rocinante faring lately…? :-)

      rafa


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Categories

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 247 other followers

%d bloggers like this: