Saturday, January 18, 2014

Speaking about the United Nations (with an Update)

by oldschooltwentysix

(originally posted at oldschooltwentysix) 

Recently, in the context of a discussion about indigenous rights and whether Jews are an indigenous people in Israel, I stood up for the notion of the UN, and international law, having positive effects in areas that people can easily overlook.

But not to be misconstrued, the UN has a very dark side.

The most recent example is the cancellation, days before opening, by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, UNESCO, of a landmark exhibit at its Paris headquarters this Monday on “The 3,500 Year Relationship of the Jewish People and the Land of Israel,” curated together with the Simon Wiesenthal Center.

According to UN Watch, whose blog is one worth following:
The surprise here isn’t that UNESCO chief Irina Bokova surrendered to the Arab League’s protest, rudely cancelling an event for which invitations were already sent out, and which involved painstaking work over two years by renowned Hebrew University scholar Robert Wistrich.
For anyone who knows anything about UNESCO — the first UN body, in November 2011, to deem “Palestine” a state — surrender to Arab pressure on this matter was inevitable.
When it comes to UNESCO:
Despite the repeated claims of the Obama Administration that UNESCO is God’s gift to the Jews, and to humanity, the opposite is true: it is arguably the most anti-Jewish body in the entire United Nations.
If the notorious UN Human Rights Council dedicates a full 50 percent of its resolutions to demonizing the Jewish state, at UNESCO the numbers are 100 percent.
That’s right: all of UNESCO's condemnatory resolutions are against Israel.
Check out the complete post. And for those who may feel surprise by the behavior of UNESCO described by UN Watch, learn more about the situation at UNESCO, an intergovernmental UN organization that by all appearances has strayed far from its mandate defined by education, science, and culture, and traveled down the road of politics and abuse that many sensible and peace loving people plainly see. And they see right!

UPDATE: Here is a link to the letter from UNESCO to the Wiesenthal Center concerning the cancellation.


  1. UN Watch is definitely a blog worth following.

    It should be on the sidebar here, Mike, wink wink... ;)

    1. You will find it at

      Someone close to me funds it.!!

  2. From my Blog piece

    "If the notorious UN Human Rights Council dedicates a full 50 percent of its resolutions to demonizing the Jewish state, at UNESCO the numbers are 100 percent.

    That’s right: all of UNESCO’s condemnatory resolutions are against Israel.

    In 2009, the UNESCO Executive Board adopted eight resolutions against the Jewish state at its 181st session and 182nd session, and then another two resolutions against Israel at the 35th session of the General Conference.

    In 2010, the UNESCO Executive Board adopted 10 decisions against Israel at its 184th session and 185th session.

    In 2011, the UNESCO Executive Board again adopted 10 decisions against Israel at its 186th session and 187th session, and another two resolutions against Israel at the 36th session of the General Conference.

    1. Makes you wonder, as Neuer said, why UNESCO even gave approval in the first place.

    2. Why? Because it's theater. They get more Jew Hatred out of changing their minds. If they had never approved it all it would have never happened as a story. As it is, the UN gets to trot out their Jew Hatred even louder. Again, you seem to think they shy away from this stuff. They do not.

  3. School,

    sorry for not responding sooner, but things have been a tad crazed around these parts.

    In my own post, above, I highlight - along with FresnoZionist and The Algemeiner - that the Obama administration agrees with the Arab League that UNESCO should subdue Jewish history.

    I suppose that ultimately my question, as it pertains to the UN and international law, is whether the rather negligible upside outweighs the heinous downside?

    This is not the kind of question that someone can have a definitive and final answer upon... I suppose. Nonetheless, there is little question that the UN is a hostile organization and thus one that we should not support.

    As with the Democratic party, and the progressive-left, more generally, we can seek to influence it by staying within the fold, but I do not see that approach trending in a positive manner.

    It seems to me that there simply comes a point wherein you look at an organization or a political party or political movement that is working directly against the well-being of one's own people and you say, "Enough of this."

    I have reached that point.

  4. I think the upside is more than negligible, as is the downside. It depends on the issue and situation.

    When it comes to the Democrats, and the progressive left, which are different, I don't presume to have any influence, especially in the blogosphere, which is probably the most close-minded of all places.

    I would like to find a good book or resource for ignorants, like a dummy book, which I could give to the open-minded. Until they come to understand that they are manipulated and duped by self-interested ideologues, they will continue to look the other way, in a haze of disinformation that masks malice.