"If the draft resolution as it currently stands is adopted, U.S. law demands that the U.S. withhold all funds from the U.N.," Anne Bayefsky, the Zionist director of the Touro University Institute on Human Rights and the Holocaust. Touro University is unknown to the broader academic world as it promotes one religion and the Zionist platform, sort of a Jewish cognate of the fundamentalist Christian institution, Liberty University founded by Jerry Falwell. [See for example: https://forward.com/news/146221/touro-under-scrutiny-over-israel-class/]
The U.S. in 1990 passed Public Law 101-246, which focused on authorizing appropriations for fiscal 1990 and 1991 for the Department of State. Section 414 of the bill highlighted concerns over the inclusion of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) in the United Nations and specialized agencies.
The section states, "No funds authorized to be appropriated from this act or any other Act shall be available for the United Nations or any specialized agency thereof which accords the Palestine Liberation Organization the same standing as member states." It may be worthwhile to remind Ms. Bayefsky that the PLO was ultimately recognized by the world and the US as the sole representative of the Palestinian nation and that the PLO and Israel mutually recognized each other in the Oslo and Madrid agreements of 1993.
"A majority of U.N. member states are not free democracies," she said, insinuating that since Islamic and Arab states are not democracies, they have no right to dispute Israel's right to exist, knowing that the criminal Jewish theocracy known as Israel is itself far from being a democracy, since it grants rights and privileges to its foreign-migrant Jewish population only and, since its artificial colonial inception on another people’s land, has continued to expand its brutal Apartheid practices against the native indigenous Palestinian population.
The U.S. likely did not think it would have to wrangle with this problem, especially as American representatives at the U.N. continue to veto measures to recognize the Palestinians as a full member of the organization. However, a new draft resolution would seek what some have called a "workaround" that would seek the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) to approve powers to vote and veto without official recognition as a full member of the organization.
The US has not ceased calling for a Palestinian State, as long as it is manufactured and tailored to suit the barbaric Zionist regime. How can an occupied colonized and brutalized people like the Palestinians negotiate genuine freedom from their occupiers and genociders?
A U.S. State Department spokesperson said that the U.S. is aware of the draft resolution and “reiterate[s] our concerns with any effort to extend certain benefits to entities when there are unresolved questions as to whether the Palestinians currently meet the criteria under the U.N. charter."
"The United States is committed to intensifying its engagement – with the Palestinians and the rest of the region – not only to address the current crisis in Gaza but to advance a political settlement that will create a path to Palestinian statehood and membership in the United Nations," the spokesperson added, noting "direct negotiations" as the path toward statehood. But again, how can negotiations be fruitful if only one side has all the advantages (military, economic, territorial, etc.)? That was tried in Oslo and Madrid, and those negotiations have failed because Israel continues to negotiate in bad faith: Israel, as the Zionist government constantly reminds us, does not want a free independent Palestinian State. How then should the world trust such negotiations?
Israeli Ambassador to the U.N., the charlatan Zionist Gilad Erdan, said the resolution provides de facto status and rights of a state. Therefore, he orders that his maid, the US, "completely stop funding the U.N. and its institutions, in accordance with American law" should the resolution pass.
If the US genuinely lived by these and other principles, it would have either not created the UN to begin with or stopped funding the UN the day after the creation of the UN: The totalitarian Communist Soviet Union was a charter member of the UN as of 24 October 1945. It would have stopped funding the UN when Communist China joined in 1949. But with Palestine, there has to be a double standard because to do otherwise, to recognize Palestine, would cast a long shadow on the legitimacy of the Apartheid colonial state of Israel born in utter violence against the native indigenous Palestinian people.
One may argue that the UN has globally failed as an institution. After its first and failed attempt at making peace by militarily enforcing its resolution on the Korean War in 1950, the UN stopped trying because the nuclear bullies (US, China, Russia, France and Britain) paralyzed any UN action that was perceived to be against their interests. Thousands of resolutions have since been passed that have never been implemented. The suggestion of defunding the UN, though coming from a State that has violated all UN resolutions, is a good idea. To shut down the UN renders all its resolutions moot and non-enforceable, including resolution 181 of 29 November 1947, when the UN General Assembly adopted the plan to partition Palestine and create Israel.
Brett Schaefer, the senior research fellow in international regulatory affairs at the conservative pro-Zionist Heritage Foundation, laid out the ongoing issues that admitting the Palestinians into the United Nations would pose, such as the fact that Hamas remains the official ruling party of the Gaza Strip, which would mean admitting a terrorist organization into the United Nations with the power and benefits of a member state. But Mr. Schaefer is oblivious to the fact that many “terrorist” regimes are members of the UN: Iran, China, Russia and indeed, Israel itself. He also contradicts himself because in the post-Gaza War period, Hamas will no longer be in charge: If there is no Hamas in the Palestinian government, would the idiot Schaefer accept Palestine as a member state of the UN?
"There is no question that Palestinians do not meet that criteria [sic]," Schaefer insisted. Referring to Hamas, he noted that "their founding documents call for the destruction of Israel. They have sponsored terrorist acts for decades." But the Zionist terror regime in Tel Aviv has recognized Palestine and deals on a routine basis with the Palestinian Authority. Moreover, the Israeli terror regime itself has never ceased calling for the destruction of Palestine and the extermination of its people, and continues its reign of terror on lands it illegally occupies. So what gives?
Israel is unable to make up its mind: It wants to annex all Palestinian lands. But these lands come with 5 million Palestinians Israel does not want in its “Jewish-only” supremacist state. So what the fuck does Israel want? Perhaps Israel is planning to extend its ongoing ethnic cleansing in Gaza to the rest of Palestine, including the West Bank (4 million Palestinians), the Galilee (2 million Palestinians) and East Jerusalem (0.5 million). The Zionists dream of expelling all these Palestinians in one huge ethnic cleansing campaign in order to have a purely Jewish Israel.
Israel is not a peace-loving state. As a colonial invader, plunderer and exterminator of the indigenous people of Palestine, Israel thrives on violence. Peace is not suitable to expansionist colonialist Israel which continues to refuse to write down a constitution because doing so would force it to declare its final borders. But the Zionists, ever since they started raping Palestine some 100 years ago, want to steal more land from their neighbors, and it has become adept at nurturing violence and instability under claims of self-defense and terrorism in order to achieve its colonial expansion and theft of land and resources.
No comments:
Post a Comment