Only In Israel

Sunday, August 21, 2005

UN Budget

UN's choices of spending its funds, or actually the funds of world citizens paying for it have always been bizarre.
But now, there's a new addition. After funding the retirement of a Nazi officer, Kojo Annan's annual vacation, and Saddam Hussein's palaces the UN finds a budget for a new cause T-shirts, signs and coffee mugs bearing Anti-Israeli slogans:

America's newly installed ambassador to the United Nations, John Bolton, labeled "inappropriate and unacceptable" the United Nations Development Program financing of materials bearing the slogan "Today Gaza, Tomorrow the West Bank and Jerusalem."

Mr. Bolton said yesterday that the UNDP had failed to explain why it funneled money to the Palestinian Authority to back the production of banners, bumper stickers, mugs, and T-shirts bearing the provocative slogan as well as UNDP logos.

Lovely. It's always good to discover that all the economical problems in Palestinian economy were solved, noone's starving anymore and the only deficit remaining is that of flags and racist slogans printed on coffee mugs, and thank god the UN can solve that problem. I wonder who got the bill for that one.
What's next on UN's budget? "Kill the Joos" signs for the next NDP protest? Maybe they'll supply the KKK with a yearly supply of wooden crosses with the UN logo stamped on them? Or how about "Jews control my country and all I got is this lousy T-shirt" shirts?

7 Comments:

  • Hey come and speak up, this is an anti Israel pro Hamas blog out of Princeton Theology Seminary.

    We so need more voices to add balance from out side.

    Please come help! We need more Israel supporters!

    http://cleave.blogs.com/pomomusings/2005/08/israelipalestin.html

    By Blogger callieischatty, at 7:15 AM, August 21, 2005  

  • This is definitely connected

    Also Nemesis, remember how I talked about how bias the UN is.

    Well this one spells it out

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/index.cfm?ObjectID=10342288

    By Anonymous Manker, at 10:09 PM, August 24, 2005  

  • Let's see, can someone please explain the the problem with: "Today Gaza, tomorrow the West Bank and Jerusalem" ? This is what most Palestinians, many Israelis and most of the world expects is necessary to achieve peace. This is the two-state solution. This is international law.

    So are you all of you really then supporters of a single, democratic state for Palestinians and Jews living together ? How very open-minded of you. I wasn't giving you enough credit.

    Sure, the UN should not be involved in sloganeering for anyone, but it seems our blogger thinks the slogan he quoted is "racist" and supports "killing Jews". How ?

    It kind of begs the question blogger, if you can't accept a Palestinian state in Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem, what do you want ? How do you ever expect to live with Palestinians ? And if that Gaza, the West Bank and Jerusalem is racist in your view, what in the world isn't racist ?

    I hate to say it, but with views like yours, there would appear to be no hope. I never ceased to be amazed by some of these viewpoints.


    ISMer

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 3:19 AM, August 25, 2005  

  • Let's see, can someone please explain the the problem with: "Today Gaza, tomorrow the West Bank and Jerusalem" ?

    The proganda slogan doesn't really bother me, because thats how its always been.

    However the REAL issue here is that the UN funded these T-Shirts, hats, and etc. This shows that the organization is becoming a partner and supporting one side in a dispute between two parties. Considering that this is agaisnt the UN's own charter. It also makes it that the UN cannot be considered a neutral mediator because of their predesposition to the palestinian side.

    This also makes UN resolutions worthless because of this predesposition. It's the equivilant of a pro-Israel group making a bunch of anti-palestinian resolutions. It could have representatives from all over the world, but no one would take it seriously.

    This is what most Palestinians, many Israelis and most of the world expects is necessary to achieve peace.

    No, this is not what will achieve peace. When the Palestinians stop saying I'm the offspring of monkey's and pigs then thats a start. When the palestinians say, we except Israel's right to exists than we have truely reached a major step. And when they stop calling tel-aviv, be'er sheva, and all other places that have Jews with them 'settlements' (in what you call "Israel proper") then we can talk peace.

    This is the two-state solution.

    The two-state solution means that their will be, two-states. It does not mean this "all or nothing" attitude.

    This is international law.

    International law says their has to be two-states? It writes that directly?

    And I'm still waiting for your response on Palstinian national charter article 24, and the Egyptian & Jordanian armistice agreements.

    You have yet to prove that the territory is anything but disputed.

    So are you all of you really then supporters of a single, democratic state for Palestinians and Jews living together ?

    Now you are simply trying connect two things that are independent of one another.

    Just because I do not believe that they have a right to Jerusalem or all the territory in the west bank does not mean I support living in a single bi-national state. A palestinian state can exists without Jerusalem and parts of the West bank.

    How very open-minded of you. I wasn't giving you enough credit.

    Yet again more games. You are trying to connect open-mindedness with a single state solution. Just because someone does not believe in a single state solution does not mean they are not open-minded.

    I also must ask this question, why is it those who are pushing for a palestinian state so badly are willing to drop that demand at a drop of a hat, for a single bi-national state?

    Sure, the UN should not be involved in sloganeering for anyone,

    At least you admit that much.

    but it seems our blogger thinks the slogan he quoted is "racist" and supports "killing Jews". How ?

    Considering that this usually leads or is insinuated in the comments, that after that or with that will take over and "Liberate the rest of palestine". Thats where the killing Jews comes from.

    It's racists because the UN is supporting the idea of an ethinically pure arab state. They are saying that one group of people (the palestinians) have more rights. In that they can live anywhere between the sea and Jordan (by supporting the "right fo return BS"), while Jews are only allowed to live in certain areas.

    It kind of begs the question blogger, if you can't accept a Palestinian state in Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem, what do you want ?

    Yet again another game. You are trying to say just because someone doesn't agree with a palestinian state in all those areas, that they want something else than peace. And yet again, just because someone doesn't agree with that, doesn't mean that they don't think that a palestinian shouldn't exists, they just don't agree with their territorial claims.

    How do you ever expect to live with Palestinians ?

    Your repeating yourself, yet again with connecting territory and peace. This demand of "All or nothing" or better put "give me everything I want or die".

    And if that Gaza, the West Bank and Jerusalem is racist in your view, what in the world isn't racist ?

    I'll let OnlyinIsrael handle this one, cause I don't understand the question here.

    I hate to say it, but with views like yours, there would appear to be no hope.

    With people like you I know definitely their is no hope for humanity.

    I never ceased to be amazed by some of these viewpoints.

    I am never ceased to be amazed by fact that you connect two completely independent things, and say unless one happens, the other won't.

    By Anonymous Manker, at 10:48 AM, August 25, 2005  

  • The problem with "Today Gaza, Tommorow the West Bank and Jerusalem" Calls for ethnic cleansing of the entire jewish population of the West bank and Jerusalem. And No, noone in the world excepet for a few jewhaters and Jihadists believes ethnic cleansing of every last jew from Jerusalem is a solution for "peace".
    I do not support a single state solution, mostly because I wouldn't like to have people with a death-worshipping cultures as citizens of my country. I also wouldn't like to expose the Israeli Arab community to the Palestinians. It would only do them bad, as they're currently more advanced, educated and developed than any other Arab group on the globe.
    I do not, and WILL not, accept a Palestinian state with East Jerusalem as part of it. Nor would most Israelis, in a concensus crossing the entire political system from Labour to Likud, Jerusalem will not be split again.
    And I haven't called it racist, just genocidal. Because if the UN would fund the klan calling for an expulsion of African Americans from the USA it would cause a war, but that's just another bit of the double standard the world has.

    By Blogger OnlyInIsrael, at 3:58 PM, September 02, 2005  

  • All Israeli settlers must withdraw from the West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem, not because they are Jews, but because the settlers are there in violation of international law, specifically the Fourth Geneva Convention, which forbids an occupying power (Israel) from transferring its population onto occupied land (The West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip). International law applies to any people, any religion, any nationality and any place - Jews, Muslims, Christians, Hindus, etc.. It is highly deceptive to try and cast this as targeting Jews.

    Claiming that removing Israeli settlers is ethnic cleansing of Jews is even more deceptive to the point of turning reality on its head. Israel is the party engaged in a process of slow ethnic cleansing (though not slow in 1948), expelling Palestinians from their land and homes in the Occupied Territories and within Israel and attempting to create a Jewish state, with as few Palestinians as possible within that state. This ethnic cleansing of Palestinians is being accomplished through the construction of settlements, settlement roads, military outposts, home demolitions, harrassment by armed settlers and soldiers, the construction of the Wall and through "legal means". Palestinians are being squeezed by Israel onto smaller and smaller pockets of land. Removing the settlers from occupied territory would be one step towards reversing Israel's effort at ethnic cleansing of the Palestinian people. Trying to cast it otherwise is humorous.

    Leave the settlers in a Palestinian state ? Perhaps many Palestinians could accept that. However, no one should accept settlers remaining on Palestinian land if it means that the settlers would retain control of huge areas of land, water and other resources that they stole from Palestinians. Why would any Palestinians, or anyone from anywhere in the world for that matter, accept that 9,000 Israeli settlers would control 33% of the Gaza Strip and use most of the water, while 1.3 million Palestinians live on the remainder of the land, with almost no water ?

    As for your inability to accept East Jerusalem as Palestinian, well, I'm afraid you will never be able to live in peace with your neighbors, or even with the rest of the world. If you really believe Palestinians will accept a state without East Jerusalem, you are living in a make believe world.

    You seem to like to blur together Jerusalem and East Jerusalem when you write in order to confuse the issue. Almost the entire world calls for Israeli settlers to withdraw from East Jersualem where they live in settlements in violation of international law. Withdrawing from East Jerusalem is, therefore, not a question for Jihadists and Jew-haters, but again, it a question of simple right and wrong and international law.

    Soldier blogger, you have clearly revealed yourself as deluded, out of touch with the world and with standards of morality. With your understanding of the world and your situation, and your willingness to continue to deprive another people of their basic rights, you are indeed dooming yourself and your children to perpetual conflict. Continuing to deprive Palestinians of basic human rights is not a solution.


    ISMer

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 8:50 PM, September 02, 2005  

  • The filthy ISMer is totally viral. What a sickening, delusional creature he is. It is funny when the ISMer states that Israel deprives the Palestinian Arab of human rights when the Palestinian Arab terrorists indiscrminately murder the innocent Israeli civilians. May all ISMers join Rat Corrie in hell!

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10:32 AM, November 02, 2005  

Post a Comment

<< Home