• Text smaller
  • Text bigger

That collective negation of humanity, the United Nations General Assembly, voted Thursday to designate “Palestine” a “non-member observer state.” The measure passed by a huge margin, with 138 nations voting in favor and only nine against (including the U.S. and Canada), along with 41 abstentions.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton called the vote “unfortunate and counterproductive … plac[ing] further obstacles in the path of peace.” Despite the U.S. opposition (coming after four years of Obama’s thinly veiled hostility toward Israel), this vote represented the sanction of a terror war against innocent civilians made possible by an increasingly weak America on the world stage. As America goes, so goes the defense of freedom. Is it any surprise that less than a month after Obama’s re-election, jihadists go forward with a vote for a terror statelet in Gaza and inside Israel?

This vote was not really any surprise. The Organization of Islamic Cooperation, or OIC, rammed it through. The OIC (56 Muslim countries plus the Muslim-occupied areas of Israel that are known as the “Palestinian” territories) is the largest international world body today, and the largest voting bloc at the U.N. And not once does even one of those Muslim countries ever vote contrary to the Islamic supremacist agenda. Ever. So how did you think the vote was going to go?

How times have changed. The League of Nations, the predecessor of the United Nations, voted unanimously in 1922 in favor of the idea that “recognition has been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country.”

The modern era of the savage, that’s where civilization is in 2012. Former Ambassador John Bolton remarked that Obama’s failure regarding Israel and a “Palestinian” state was not something that had begun “in the past couple of weeks,” but was instead the latest manifestation of “an ongoing failure in the Obama administration to take this issue seriously.”

Meanwhile, as Anne Bayefsky reminded us in her testimony back in June 2006 before the Senate Subcommittee concerning the U.N.’s lack of accountability and transparency, “the world has changed a great deal from the time of the United Nations birth in 1945, and so has the United Nations. Sixty years ago democracies, both nascent and well established, comprised the majority of the founding nations of the U.N. The members of the General Assembly were strategically aligned primarily along what would become the lines of the Cold War. America was confident that the U.N. would be an organization that would work in tandem with American national interests in promoting the welfare of humankind and the basic rights of every human spirit.”

Instead, it has become the de facto arm of the OIC. The world-renowned scholar Bat Ye’or describes the OIC in this way:

Spread over four continents, it claims to speak in the name of the ummah (the universal Muslim community), which numbers about 1.3 billion. The OIC’s mission is to unite all Muslims worldwide by rooting them in the Koran and the Sunnah – the core of traditional Islamic civilization and values. It aims at strengthening solidarity and cooperation among all its members, in order to protect the interests of Muslims everywhere and to galvanize the ummah into a unified body. The OIC is a unique organization – one that has no equivalent in the world. It unites the religious, economic, military, and political strength of 56 states.

The OIC has massive funding from oil sources, which it lavishly spends on the Western media and academia and in countless “dialogues.” It influences Western policy, laws, and even textbooks through pressures brought by Muslim immigrants and by the Western nations’ own leftist parties. …

The OIC is nothing less than a “would-be, universal caliphate.” It might look different from the caliphates of the Ottomans, Fatimids, and Abbasids. It might resemble, instead, a thoroughly modern trans-national bureaucracy. But, already, the OIC exercises significant power through the United Nations, and through the European Union, which has been eager to accommodate the OIC while simultaneously endowing the U.N. with increasing authority for global governance.

Bat Ye’or adds: “The caliphate is alive and growing within Europe. … It has advanced through the denial of dangers and the obfuscating of history. It has moved forward on gilded carpets in the corridors of dialogue, the network of the Alliances and partnerships, in the corruption of its leaders, intellectuals and NGOs, particularly at the United Nations.”

And so Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu was absolutely right when he said on the day of the vote: “None of the vital interests of peace appear in the resolution that will be put forward before the General Assembly today and that is why Israel cannot accept it.” He was right. This vote for a fictional “Palestinian” state won’t bring peace. If anything, it signals the end of the last great hope for peace, the Oslo “Peace Process.”

The Oslo “Peace” charade has been dead since the second intifada, after Yaser Arafat, the godfather of modern terror, refused the offer of practically everything the jihadists demanded in a “Palestinian” state (including Jerusalem), but now it is officially dead. Everybody now knows the big lie is over.

According to the Israel Project, “Unilaterally seeking to declare a state in the West Bank violates the Palestinians’ Oslo Accord commitments to refrain from ‘steps that will change the status of the West Bank… pending the outcome of the permanent status negotiations.’ High-ranking Palestinian officials have boasted that the resolution will mark the formal end of the decades-old Palestinian peace process with Israel.”

Now that Oslo is officially dead, will Israel, the one side that was actually adhering to the conditions and playing by the rules, finally quit the farce? They are dancing with themselves in this ludicrous peace process. There can be no peace process when the only objective of the enemy is your annihilation. You can sing kumbaya until your throat bleeds, it isn’t going to change reality.

Here’s the thing. The Palestinian Muslims were offered a state in 1948 when the British mandate was being partitioned at this very same UN (although it is vastly different now in mission). Palestinian Muslims wanted a state so bad? Really? Why didn’t they take it in 1948 or the multiple times Israel and various international coalitions (i.e. the quartet) made overly generous offers? Thursday’s vote was not about a “Palestinian” state; it was about rewarding savagery and Hamas terror and denying the Jewish people their homeland. That’s what this is all about. And this never would have happened without the *wink wink* *nod nod* of President Obama in league with the butchers. More of the gruesome consequences of a weak and feckless President.

They want to roll back Oslo? Let’s do it. All the way. Palestinian Islamic Jihad is preparing what they called a “more savage and bloody round” of war with Israel. When this savagery begins, Israel must be allowed to defend itself. If Barack Obama forces another ill-advised Muslim Brotherhood-devised truce upon the Israelis, the consequences could be disastrous not just for Israel, but for the free world in general.

The poison fruit of Obama’s anti-freedom foreign policy failures just keeps getting more rancid.

  • Text smaller
  • Text bigger
Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.