About Me

Name: Dan Hennessy
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Archives

Blog Roll

 
Uncategorized

Elevating the View of the U.N.'s Role in the 21st Century

By Daniel Hennessy

What is the role of the United Nations in the 21st century? In a very real way, the U.N.’s persistent willingness to offer the perception of legitimacy to the Arafats and Ahmadinejads of the world provides high-octane fuel to the vicious dedication of the terrorist forces they train, finance, and arm, contributing directly to the effort to finish the work of Adolf Hitler.  In its current role, the U.N. provides a direct power connection between the antisemitic values that drove the Holocaust of the Nazi Third Reich in the 20th century and the antisemitic values of the hoped for Holocaust driving the Islamic Jihadist Fourth Reich in the 21st century.

In her essay, “The U.N. and the Jews,” Anne Bayefsky, a professor of political science at York University in Toronto and an adjunct professor at Columbia University Law School, makes a reasonable case for viewing the U.N. with suspicion in relation to its actions toward Israel: “…in 1975 the UN General Assembly passed its notorious resolution explicitly equating Zionism with racism. Ever since then, and notwithstanding the formal repeal of the resolution in 1991, the repellent imagery of Israelis as racists has been a staple of UN rhetoric.”

“To judge by the UN's official pronouncements, the Jewish state is the world's archetypal human-rights villain. Over the past 40 years, almost 30 percent of the resolutions passed by the UN Commission on Human Rights to condemn specific states have been directed at Israel, which also has the distinction of being the only state to which the commission has devoted an entire item on its agenda.

“As for the General Assembly, of the ten emergency special sessions it has convened in its history, six have focused on the purported misdeeds of Israel. In 2003, the General Assembly passed eighteen resolutions that singled out Israel for criticism; human-rights situations in the rest of the world drew only four country-specific resolutions. Nor, despite serious and well-documented charges of abuse reported to the UN over the years from, among others, the organization's own special rapporteurs, has any resolution of the UN Commission on Human Rights ever been directed at China, Syria, Bahrain, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Yemen, Pakistan, Malaysia, Mali, or Zimbabwe.

“By Palestinians and others, Israelis are now routinely condemned with Nazi terminology—current resolutions speak of the "Judaization" of Jerusalem—or are themselves likened to Nazis.

Why does an international organization founded upon a mission to promote justice among the nations behave in extremist fashion toward one nation in particular? How has such flagrant intolerance persisted in light of five wars launched by the Arab nations in simple defiance of Israel's right to exist? How many resolutions have been passed against the Arab-Islamic terror campaign being waged against Israel since 1989? Why hasn't the U.N. investigated the original source of the "Palestinian" refugees' dilemma and placed accountability at the feet of the Arab nations, where it belongs, to re-absorb the Jordanians, Saudis, etc. that have never been allowed to return to their native countries since the pan-Arab leadership called them out of their homes just prior to attacking the internationally legitimized Jewish state?

The antisemitic attitude legitimized, authorized, and promoted by the United Nations should be seen as a form of harassment of the Jewish people at least; at its worst, it could be regarded as tacit approval of and disguised permission for the ongoing terrorist assault upon the people of Israel. Tragically, the actions of the U.N. against Israel must increasingly be considered as a form of institutionalized political policy meant to generate institutionalized hate. It must be critically regarded as a very well-orchestrated agenda that major world leaders continue to passively accept.

As Professor Bayefsky writes, "At the UN, Israelis and Jews are, by definition, oppressors, as are the nations and organizations that rally to their cause."

State-sponsored Arab mass media continues to spew antisemitic hate throughout the Arab world, to include propagation of such well known myths as Jewish blood libel and Jewish political conspiracies to rule the world. In this regard, not long ago the thoroughly debunked antisemitic conspiracy-based fiction employed by Nazi propagandists, "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion," was a bestseller in the Palestinian territories and throughout large parts of the Arab world. Arab state-sponsored television has conceived, produced, and broadcast multi-episodic programming that dramatizes grotesque antisemitic untruths about the Jewish people. Most despicable of all, state-sponsored Arab schools, from kindergarten age and up, promote antisemitic hate throughout their curricula, proscribing martyrdom and every form of violent confrontation with the Jewish people and those who dare support them. None of this is done primarily in the name of any mere human being or for the cause of any claim to human superiority. All of this is done in the name of a greater, more elevated cause: the will of Allah.

This is one reason why the world must view the current jihadist threat—and the United Nations' relationship to it—from an elevated point of view.

If I think about this from within the expanded parameters of transcendent reason, I hear myself say: “This is to be expected as the normal, logical course of events captured in the ancient texts which speak of the "beyond time and space realities" that foretell of this very behavior being played out in the exact geo-political format that exists today.” 

We live in unprecedented times, more dangerous than the Nazi threat, more volatile than the Cold War.  Which is why we must begin to consider our circumstances through an expanded framework of a more transcendent logic; a framework that allows free thinking in a more open-ended universe of thought than is normally allowed within the more restricted, convenient, and conventional circles of accepted political and philosophical dialogue.

Such a rigorous campaign of antisemitic political programming by such a pinnacle international organization can only be accounted for from a higher, more transcendent point of view. It is that view, and only that view, that provides conclusive insight into the role of the United Nations in the 21st century.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Ahmadinejad, Rudi Guliani, Blessings, and Curses

By Daniel Hennessy


The United Nations has yet again disgraced itself by allowing Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to address a gathering of its General Assembly… for the second time. 


Thank goodness for the New York Police Department who denied his request to lay a wreath at the site of the 9/11 attack at ground zero.  
New York’s finest knows a criminal and a security risk when they see one… and treats them in light of the truth.  What the U.N. doesn’t apparently understand is that at this stage of the world’s most volatile developing international show-down, the inflammatory words of the apocalypse-focused Ahmadinejad provide a great pre-war threat to global security.  As it is, the U.N. willingly advanced the propaganda aspect of Ahmadinejad’s overall terror program once already, back in September of 2006 when he lectured the world, largely on spiritual matters, closing his speech with the following petition to Allah:

 “0, Almighty God, all men and women are Your creatures and You have ordained their guidance and salvation. Bestow upon humanity that thirsts for justice, the perfect human being promised to all by You, and make us among his followers and among those who strive for his return and his cause.”

Of course, becoming “his followers” is U.N.-appropriate speech for "convert to Islam" — or else.  Afterall, this is the same Ahmadinejad who, in October of 2005, declared that Israel, “must be wiped out from the map of the world.”  The same Ahmadinejad whose regime actively trains, finances, and arms terrorists and extremists while hosting international conferences that advance the lie of Holocaust denial.  All in the hope of fulfilling his main mission, as he recounted in a Nov. 16 speech in Tehran, to "pave the path for the glorious reappearance of Imam Mahdi, may Allah hasten his reappearance."  He is also the same Ahmadinejad who just this past June publicly reaffirmed his genocidal intent toward Israel, stating in a speech, “God willing, in the near future we will witness the destruction of the corrupt occupier regime.” 


The U.S. State Department is showing off a comparable capacity for hypocrisy in it’s own weak-kneed defense of Ahmadinejad's speaking engagement, hiding beneath the vague, flimsy veil of "maintaining diplomatic openness."  This is a tragic, insulting position to take, as a recent Washington Times editorial rightly points out: 

“Under the shadow of the Holocaust, the United Nations was founded in 1945 by a war-torn world weary of conflict and was ready to embrace peace, social progress and human rights. Mr. Ahmadinejad has chosen not to engage in a respectful dialogue and is instead calling for another genocide—and of the same original victims. This is in flagrant disregard of the U.N.'s mission.”

The U.N. continues to behave along the lines of its antisemitic character.  (But more on that in a next posting.)


This most recent development in the U.N.'s toothless oversight of the Iranian nuclear threat calls to mind the bold past actions of one individual who did not sit passively by when another international terrorist was treated by the U.N. General Assembly as a legitimate statesman.


In 1995, as mayor of
New York City, Rudi Giuliani set the proper tone for Western leadership in the war against Islamic jihadism. 


When the pioneer of modern terrorism, the late Yassar Arafat, was in
New York to address the United Nations, Mr. Giuliani declared him unwelcome at city-sponsored events.  Having been informed by a spokesman for the United States Mission to the United Nations that the Clinton Administration had made it clear that Mr. Arafat could be invited to local events during his visit, Firestone described the clear conviction evident in Mr. Guliani's response: “…the Mayor, explaining his decision… called Mr. Arafat a murderer and a terrorist, and said he was not impressed by the fact that Mr. Arafat had twice been invited to the White House to sign the Middle East peace accords, or that he shared the Nobel Peace Prize.”


When Mr. Arafat showed up at the
Lincoln Center for a United Nations-sponsored performance by the New York Philharmonic, Mayor Guliani had the then-chairman of the PLO ejected.  As one version of the story goes, when told that Mr. Arafat had entered the concert hall, Mayor Guliani told his chief of staff, Randy Mastro, to ask him to leave. “Randy told him that he wasn’t invited, he wasn’t welcome, and we would prefer that he leave,” Mr. Giuliani said.  “He stayed for a while, then he left.”


According to a New York Times article by David Firestone on October 25, 1995, after being sharply criticized by the Clinton Administration, Mr. Giuliani, “...clearly relishing the controversy, insisted that he could never forgive and play host to Mr. Arafat even though the Palestinian leader has been embraced as a peacemaker by the Israeli and United States Governments.”


“Mr. Giuliani said his antipathy toward Mr. Arafat – like his antipathy toward the Cuban leader Fidel Castro – went back to his days as a Federal prosecutor.  As United States Attorney, he investigated several terrorist incidents to which the P.L.O. was linked, including the hijacking in 1985 of the Achille Lauro cruise ship.  As far as he was concerned, the Mayor said, the statute of limitations on those incidents has not run out.”


That's the tone of effective leadership that must prevail if we are to win the war against Islamic jihadism.

 

Why?  Because whomever blesses Israel will be blessed and whomever curses them will be cursed.  It is through Israel that all the nations are blessed (Genesis 12:3).

Rudi Guliani continues to move in one direction.  Watch the United Nations closely.  It's overall effect upon the world is moving just the opposite. 

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Feeding On The Wind

By Dan Hennessy

“Ephraim feeds on the wind; he pursues the east wind all day and multiplies lies and violence. He makes a treaty with Assyria and sends olive oil to Egypt.”

Hosea 12:1 

I remember the sinking sensation in my heart upon reading the news that the Israeli government had officially handed the village of Bethlehem over to Yassar Arafat’s bloody political front, the so-called “Palestinian Authority.”  It was in December, 1995.  My thoughts turned immediately to Herod’s massacre of the children there nearly two thousand years ago.  My stomach turned at the thought of Bethlehem once more in the hands of a mass murderer.

Immediately after that, it occurred to me that Herod failed in his attempt to assassinate the newborn King, and the sense of drowning disappeared.  Nevertheless, twelve years later, it feels like the birthplace of David and Jesus is still being held hostage, subject to abuse every day by its new terrorist landlords.

In a graphic demonstration of utmost insult and arrogance to everyone involved, the first thing that Arafat,“the father of modern terrorism,” did as the new “owner” of Bethlehem, was to turn the Greek Orthodox monastery into his personal domicile during periodic visits to the city, without prior consent of the church. The Latin patriarch, Greek Archbishop, Anglican bishop and Lutheran bishop were all Palestinian Arabs at the time and became effective propaganda mouthpieces throughout the Christian world.  As a result of unceasing persecution, according to a 1997 Israeli government report, Christians were immediately forced to behave like any oppressed minority which aims to survive within a hostile environment. They were forced to pray in secret.  Christian cemeteries were destroyed, monasteries had their telephone lines cut, and there were break-ins to convents. But, this should not have been an unexpected development.  According to the Quranic/sharia concept of “dhimmi-tude,” Jews and Christians living within Muslim occupied territories are “protected” if agreeably subject to increased taxes and a diminished status of citizenship.  During the British mandate period, Bethlehem had a Christian majority of 80%. Today, under Palestinian rule, it has a Muslim majority of 80%.

That sinking sensation returned on Friday, August 31st, when Arutz Sheva/Israel National News published the story that the Olmert Administration has agreed in writing “to hand over 6,250 square kilometers of land – the equivalent of its entire biblical and strategic heartland - to an Arab terror state."  The land involved is the equivalent of all of Judea, Samaria, and Gaza.

So reported Dr. Guy Bechor, a leading expert on Arab affairs, apparently based on "leaks from the Palestinian side." According to Bechor, the agreement calls for a state named “Palestine” to be established alongside Israel. Says Bechor, “Most of the Jewish communities built in Judea and Samaria over the past 40 years are to be demolished and their inhabitants expelled, according to the plan.”

Such undermining decisions by Israeli leadership may seem treasonous in light of the unsuccessful assaults on its existence since 1948, but such damaging decisions are not unprecedented in its history.
Referring directly to
Israel's futile foreign relations policy, the aforementioned verse from the prophet Hosea was a prophecy delivered as Israel was seeking the aid of the Egyptian king in violation of their covenant with Assyria.  Hosea likens Israel’s dependence on treaties to pursuing “the east wind all day.”  The “east wind” refers to a pernicious thing, as it blows from the desert and is destitute of moisture necessary for vegetation. It is primarily associated with evil and wrath in the Bible. 

According to Hosea, by pursuing such treaties, ancient Israel was “multiplying lies and violence.” Already in violation of its covenantal obligations regarding idolatry, King Ahaz, by acquiescing to the malevolently inspired demands of Israel’s enemies, was behaving in an inauthentic way that was deceitful and damaging to the people in his charge.  The policy of appeasement served to incubate violence as well.  By not standing upon what they believe in, by not acting in character with who they were in the eyes of the God of Israel, Ahaz was sending conflicting political signals to Israel’s enemies, inferring weakness and passivity, which always invites eventual attack from aggressive totalitarian powers. 

Apply this prophetic estimation of Israel’s ancient foreign policy with the nation’s current diplomatic approach of “land-for-peace,” designed to permanently pacify its current totalitarian “neighbors.”  Surely, Israel has been “feeding on the wind, pursuing the east wind all day” since the signing of the infamous “Oslo Accords” in 1993.  And no doubt “lies and violence” have indeed multiplied, especially on the part of the Arafat/Abbas-led Palestinian Authority, who place high value on duplicity and treachery as this, the third, "political" stage of the PLO-planned jihad, runs its course.

In all of the years and through all of the subsequent negotiations since then, the terrorist assault on the innocent Israeli population has intensified, not declined.  It has escalated from rock throwing to homicide bombing to bombardment by Qassam rockets delivered from Gaza, of all places, land that was “given for peace” by the Sharon Administration.  Unless you define “peace” as the jihadist Palestinian Authority does—the ultimate destruction of the state of Israel—this “pursuit of the east wind” by dovish Israeli administrations has indeed been a pernicious thing, bringing no life, only more hatred from the arid hearts of both Fatah and Hamas.

Successive U.S. administrations have chosen, in tandem with dovish Leftist governments of Israel, the same path as Ahaz, systematically handing land promised to Abraham over to the pan-Arab coalition, who, bound by the religious ties of Islam, agree that the Israeli’s have no right to exist in their own ancient homeland and that all of its land belongs to the coming Islamic world caliphate.  Just this week The Washington Post and The Washington Times both published articles citing research by Palestinian Media Watch documenting the increased influence of Islam in Palestinian society.  The Times article opened with:

“Both Hamas and the supposedly secular Fatah are engaging in a new propaganda war, each portraying itself as the defender of the faith…according to a report being released today by the Palestinian Media Watch.”

Here is an internationally sanctioned political entity, the Palestinian Authority, that thrives on religious hatred and actively practices the application of that hatred by targeting innocent men, women, and children to achieve its spiritual/political objectives, that hates others even within its own genocidal cause, and commits perhaps the most heinous sin of all against its own most vulnerable population: teaching its youngest school-age children the religion of hate before sending them off to commit homicide-by-suicide in the name of Allah.  All this, while regularly using its own women and children as human shields, then blaming the defenders of Israeli society for the harm that awaits them.

The only thing more contemptible than Israel’s dovish leadership participating in its own planned extinction is the fact that a geographically distant United States whispers such morally and spiritually repugnant counsel into the ear of its supposed friend and ally from such a perceived “safe” distance.

How has the United States, the nation that landed on the distant beaches of Normandy to crush the evil Nazi entity, descended to such an abysmal level of appeasement regarding the Hamas-controlled Palestinian Authority? 
I have my own theory, but that’s another story having to do with "feeding"on a destructive wind, best saved for another day.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »