Just a reminder of the UN's perversion and corruption

Anne Bayefsky has the latest summation of the UN's attitude towards Israel. On the one hand, no one should be surprised. After all, the UN is made up mostly of dictatorships, corrupt third world countries or combinations thereof. Democracies are a minority there, as indeed they are in the world (you can say what you like, at least the UN has accurate representation...)

"The total tally of country specific votes coming from the 2004 Commission now stands at:
Israel-5
Rest of the World-4
(the other states being Belarus, Cuba, Democratic People's Republic of Korea and Turkmenistan)."

"While those other country resolutions were being considered, the U.N. hosted a two-day meeting on Israel's security fence, April 15 and 16, directly across the hall from the commission. The juxtaposition was staggering. The same facilities were provided for a meeting on Israel as were provided for human rights on the remainder of the planet."

On the other, I'd still like to believe in something LIKE the UN. An organization that does good in the world. Maybe one day. But not today. Not the UN.

UPDATE:

Mrs Bayefsky delves a little deeper into the nightmarish monstrosity that is the UN: Business as usual at the UN

A Quote:
"Israel was treated somewhat differently by the U.N.'s primary human-rights body, which is composed of a majority of Asian and African states and whose membership includes countries with such appalling human-rights records as China, Cuba, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, and Zimbabwe.

Not only were five resolutions adopted condemning Israel, but the commission took three hours out of its schedule to mourn the death of Hamas terrorist leader Sheikh Ahmad Yassin. Yassin personally instigated and authorized suicide bombing and exhorted his followers to "armed struggle" against Israelis and Jews "everywhere." A special sitting for Yassin was convened on March 22, 2004, despite the fact that the commission was already in session, and about to consider the only country-specific agenda item at the commission for the past 34 years — on Israel. "

Please read it all.

Arab civilisation has failed... Duh!

This article by Ralph Peters makes good reading nonetheless:

"Arab civilization has failed.

Disguised in part by the trappings of oil wealth, the Middle East has become humanity's sinkhole, less promising, if richer, than Africa. But no facade of garish hotels in the hollow states that line the Persian Gulf, and no amount of full-page advertisements funded by the Saudi government, can hide the truth any longer: The Arab Middle East has become the world's first entirely parasitical culture; all it does is to imitate poorly, consume voraciously, spit hatred, export death and create nothing."

Spielberg to direct film on Munich massacre

In 1972, at the Munich Olympics eleven Israeli athletes were murdered by Arab terrorists (possibly with (unintended?) help from German policemen). One of these athletes was Joe Romano, top weightlifter and brother of two close personal friends of mine.

The devastation his murder caused in the Romano family extended well into the nineties, and it is never far from anyone's thought.

The Germans had a brief pause for a token remembrance, then went on with the Games; business as usual. What difference do a few more dead Jews make, right? At least they made the news, which is more than would have happened 30 years earlier.

Steven Spielberg has taken it upon himself to direct a Dreamworks produced movie about this outrage. I have good hopes he'll do allright by the Romano's, and by all the families and friends involved.

This is NOT news.

PLO never changed charter denying Israel's right to exist

But it doesn't hurt to repeat it. In fact, the world needs to be reminded that the murderers never changed their ideas, their plans or their ideology. Someone needs to loose a Hellfire onto the close vicinity of that disgusting sick fuck Arafat.

The origins of the "Palestinian refugees"

Read this for an eyewitness account.

Here's a taste:

"I don't know why the Sidn'a Ali people fled, but they did leave a caretaker in place, as a sign that they intended to return once those pesky Jews had been ethnically cleansed. They did not flee because they feared Jewish thugs, but because of a rational and reasonable calculus: the Jews will be exterminated; we will get out of the way while that messy and dangerous business goes forward, and we will return afterwards to reclaim our homes, and to inherit those nice Jewish properties as well.

They guessed wrong; and the Palestinians are still tortured by the residual shame of their flight. Their shame is so great because in their eyes running from Jews was like running from women; and because there were so many Sidn'a Alis. To relieve their shame they stridently and continually demand that their unsavory history be rewritten and reversed."

Or here:

"Any misdeeds committed by IDF troops during the War for Independence came against the backdrop of the Holocaustic acts and appetites of the Arabs themselves. We were only a few weeks into the first, irregular phase of the war when the slaughters began: the wholesale murder by their Arab fellow workers of some 40 Jewish workers in the Haifa refineries; the massacre of Hebrew university medical faculty and nurses on the road to Mt. Scopus; the killing of many captured Palmach fighters and kibbutzniks in the Etzion Bloc; the decimation of the truck convoys to Jerusalem. And after the killing, the real fun began. The Arab way of war is to quite explicitly “feminize” the enemy. And in '47-'48, the Aravim castrated and mutilated, in ways that I will not describe here, the fallen or captured Jewish soldiers. Incidentally, the “portraits” of their Jewish victims—both boys and girls—were afterwards peddled in Arab Jerusalem."

Please please please...

Someone, ANYONE - Shoot Tony Blair!

Killing Rantisi is just as bad as killing Jewish children on buses.

Fuck him. And everyone on his government.

On Israel's nukes

On Israel’s nuclear policy

The release from prison of Mordechai Vanunu refocuses the world’s attention on the suspected nuclear capabilities of Israel.
Israel has an official policy of ambiguity. By this it means it won’t deny or admit it has nuclear weapons in its arsenal. Israel also has declined signing the non-proliferation treaty, the purpose of which is to prevent the spread of weapons of mass-destruction (nuclear in particular). By this, Israel refuses to be part of a treaty which is enforced by a UN organisation, the IEAE, an organisation renowned for its ineffectiveness in combating proliferation. There is little doubt however that the IEAE would become a real tiger were Israel part of its mandate: The UN has never missed an opportunity to scold, condemn and harass Israel ever since it very hesitatingly authorised its birth in 1947.

Of course the world would be better off without nuclear weapons. However, no one can deny that some countries can be trusted with nuclear weapons more than others. The United States is to date still the only country that has ever used a nuclear weapon in anger, and hundreds of thousands died because of it. The weapons used against Japan are dwarfed in power by today’s strategic nuclear weapons.

The world is right to be concerned about proliferation. No one wants to see the Mad Mullahs in Iran get hold of nuclear weapons. There’s little doubt they are after them, and little doubt they’re close. There is also little doubt the threshold for using them is perilously low in Iran. More than once has its regime stated its willingness to sacrifice millions of its own in a nuclear exchange with Israel. They regard themselves as able to bear such a price, because they’ll survive it (or so they think) and the Jews won’t.

Equally worrisome is possession of nuclear weapons by regimes that may or may not directly use them, but will certainly sell them or their technology to others who will use them. Such regimes may include Syria, Pakistan, North-Korea and others.

Israel is not ruled by such a regime.

In fact, of all the countries that possess nuclear weapons, Israel is arguably the most trustworthy. Of all the others it can demonstrably be proven they have carried out tests that have harmed people, and the damage was inflicted knowingly.

Apart from the questionable morality of the “certified” holders of nuclear weapons, there is a far greater issue at stake here: Never before in known history has there been a country that since its inception has had an official and actual threat of extinction hanging over its head, in the shape of stated policy of most of its neighbours. The fact that Israel is the only Western-oriented country in the region, the fact that it is the only democracy, the fact that only 5 million Jews live there compared to the 200 million or so Arabs and other Muslims, in countries that have gone to war against Israel over and over again. The aim of these wars? Not to occupy, not to force an ideal, not for revenge: They were started to destroy Israel.

These facts alone qualify Israel as a nuclear power.

The Muslim leaders can keep this up indefinitely. They are accountable to no one. In fact, they may need to persist, as it will keep their subjects attention off a much more pressing and real need, namely life in their own countries. As long as Muslim leaders succeed in convincing their subjects that the source of all their problems is Israel, and the destruction of Israel therefore the solution of all those problems, Israel will not know peace.

And Israel cannot afford to lose a single war.

The Muslims have nothing to lose. They cannot be voted out of office. They don’t care about the human losses. The material losses are easily replaced, they control the richest resources on the planet.

Israel needs nuclear weapons more than any other country on Earth. It is the only country with a truly legitimate claim to self-defense, a need that can be met only by nuclear weapons. It also has NO allies or friends that could replace nuclear weapons as a deterrent. Israel needs to be able to rely on itself for its preservation.
In an ideal world, there would be no need for nuclear weapons. There would be no nuclear weapons. There would in fact be no weapons at all.

This is not an ideal world. This is a world where not too long ago, a very effective attempt was made to murder all Jews. Israel needs nuclear weapons to make sure that never happens again.

Wow. Dennis Prager sums it up.

This IS where it is at.

"Israel has killed Abdel Aziz Rantisi, the Hamas terror leader, and almost every nation in the world and the nations' theoretical embodiment, the United Nations, have condemned Israel for doing so.

World leaders and the world organization have said almost nothing about Communist China's ongoing destruction of one of the world's oldest civilizations, Tibet. World leaders have said almost nothing about the Arab enslavement and genocide of non-Arab blacks in Sudan. But they convene world conferences to label Israel, one of the most humane and decent democracies on earth, a pariah."

"I regard the European Union with similar revulsion. With little opposition, Europe murdered nearly every Jewish man, woman and child in its midst, and a half-century later provides cover for those in the Middle East who seek to do to the Middle East's Jews exactly what the Nazis did to the European Jews. For the European Union to condemn Israel's killing of a Hamas leader, when Hamas's avowed aim is another Jewish genocide, is so loathsome as to board the incredible. For Germany and France (who, unlike America, have almost never shed blood for the liberty of others) to do everything they can to undermine America's attempt to liberate Iraq is similarly repugnant."

Please read it all

The insanity seems limitless

Until recently, the muslim murderers always seemed to have a motive for their massacres. But since Iraq's most recent humiliation at the hands of the US, they've given up even trying. They are killing not only the people they hate (a hate for which they claim to have good reason), they are also killing their own. Iraqi's killing Iraqi's. Totally at random, or at least so it seems. Muslims killing muslims, by the hundreds. Without any pretense of a motive. And no one even wonders about this. For muslims, it seems to be natural or at least accepted and even expected behaviour. Certainly forgiveable when an American is occupying your country. Kill your neighbour and call it resistance.

I am actually at a loss for a fitting response to these psychotics.

They are killing their own children. The human race at its very worst, and we've yet to hit bottom, I'm afraid.

Iraqi mental patients run amock.

Proselytizing

I am not a religious person. I don't believe in any god(s), or in fact in anything other than chaos. Both man-made and natural.
I like synchronicity. Things that appear to be coincidental, but you like to think they're not, can't be. Like two Hamas leaders dying from an overdose of Hellfire missiles within 3 weeks of one another... Anyway.

Religion requires you to "believe" when there really is no reason to. It requires you to "have faith" in something that you will never see, or observe in any other way. It requires you to submit, to surrender to something/someone, whereas submitting and surrendering is the last thing a human being wants to do.

Religion is something only practiced by people who have been for all intents and purposes indoctrinated to accept the existence of a being larger then they. You have to have been born into a religious family, basically. If that happens, you can never truly escape it, no matter how hard you try.
But if you grow up without such brainwashing, you will never be able to accept the belief that there is a conscious, omnipotent, guiding, even directing force that causes everything to happen. Humans may not control life in general or their own in particular nearly as much as they'd like or think, but no one else does either.

Only a non-religious person can come out with a cliche like this: "If god exists, it is a monster for causing or even allowing suffering on this scale".
I am aware of all the arguments. "We have choice" (and clearly we do). "This life is hell, but the afterlife..." (of course you better behave if you want to get there).
"God works in mysterious ways,we cannot know the reason". That is circular reasoning. We cannot even know he exists, let alone his reasons for putting us through this shit.
Oriental reasoning: "Through suffering we achieve a higher plane, until we become truly enlightened". If god exists (and is omnipotent, but then, what kind of god is not?) he can enlighten me.

So I have no liking for religion. Any religion. But I like some even less than others...

I feel sorry for people who need a virtual cane like religion to get them through life. I am happier knowing that the little control I do have, I use to improve my life (or fuck it up, as the case may be). I will take credit for that.
But when people feel the need to persuade, convince or even force me to accept their beliefs, their religion stops being a benign mistake and becomes a nuisance, or a threat. And then their god better be real, cause its believers will need it for protection.

The mere concept of "mission" proves the shakiness of peoples beliefs. If you are so secure in your faith, and trust in your god to do right by you, why are you so offended when I reject it? A Jehovahs witness will leave when I kindly (yes really) tell him "no". If he persists, I'll tell him he is the one in for a big surprise when he dies. He'll shake his head and he'll decide to pray for my soul anyway. But if you trust your god, you will not feel the need to "stand up for him". If I offend him, he'll strike me down (or cast me into a sulphur lake, or something equally creative). No need for you to defend the all-powerful, all-knowing capo di tutti capi.

Face it. You're scared. You know what I know. But you can't face oblivion. Can't handle death. So against all better judgment, you're betting against all ods. Nothing wrong with that, either. As long as it's only your own life you fuck up trying to create hell in this life, just so you'll be in heaven in the next.