Negotiating with the Sponsors of Terror
The New York Times print edition for today (9-24-02) had this headline:
At U.N., U.S. Calls for End to the Siege of Arafat. A few hours later, the online headline for this story became:
U.N. Security Council Approves Mideast Measure.
Notwithstanding that the “Siege of Arafat” sounds a bit like Armageddon is upon us; easy to forget that Fat Rat Arafat is a terrorist protecting other terrorists. Regardless, there are fools who believe that this leopard will change his spots. A fool is not (usually) evil; merely weak of wit or blind to certain inconvenient facts. Now let’s move on to evil.
With a total absence of irony, the Times online later reported that the U.N. had approved a “compromise forged by European nations between an American proposal and a Syrian draft.” Syria, of course, lover of peace and freedom, is very well-known as the state supporter most directly responsible for the terrorists who carry out suicide bombings in Israel. More importantly, Syria is a “death to Israel” state, whose solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is the eradication of Israel.
Getting back to the Fat Rat, a foolish liberal (oops - redundancy) could perhaps be forgiven for believing that this time Arafat really, really, really means it and will clamp down on terrorists. Arafat’s links to terror are solid, documented in writing, but the euros and others who lack acuity may be forgiven for confusing him with the Palestinian cause. OK, willfully blind, but still not evil.
One would need to be evil, a party to terror, to ignore the Syrian contribution to terrorism. It is one thing to deal with evil regimes; quite another to engage with them as equals. This has nothing to do with national pride. It has to do with the nature of a multinational organization, the U.N, that affords such a venue to trash states such as Syria, the Sudan, Libya, not to mention holes-in-the-wall around the globe with fewer people (not to mention fewer working toilets) than Cleveland, Ohio. The United Nations, born in a rush of post-World War II bonhomie, has at best become an anachronism. In reality, it has become an impediment to the spread of democracy, freedom, and free markets.
The United States should make whatever multilateral arrangements it needs to in order to accomplish its objectives, or go it alone with our British cousins if need be. The objective is, trite but true, to make the world safe for democracy. It is past obscene to even attempt to do so in the context of an organization that has a toilet-bowl nation like Syria (no, not a shitty little country; it doesn't rate that highly) on its governing security council.
The U.S. should opt out of the U.N.; it has become an impediment to freedom.
The New York Times print edition for today (9-24-02) had this headline:
At U.N., U.S. Calls for End to the Siege of Arafat. A few hours later, the online headline for this story became:
U.N. Security Council Approves Mideast Measure.
Notwithstanding that the “Siege of Arafat” sounds a bit like Armageddon is upon us; easy to forget that Fat Rat Arafat is a terrorist protecting other terrorists. Regardless, there are fools who believe that this leopard will change his spots. A fool is not (usually) evil; merely weak of wit or blind to certain inconvenient facts. Now let’s move on to evil.
With a total absence of irony, the Times online later reported that the U.N. had approved a “compromise forged by European nations between an American proposal and a Syrian draft.” Syria, of course, lover of peace and freedom, is very well-known as the state supporter most directly responsible for the terrorists who carry out suicide bombings in Israel. More importantly, Syria is a “death to Israel” state, whose solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is the eradication of Israel.
Getting back to the Fat Rat, a foolish liberal (oops - redundancy) could perhaps be forgiven for believing that this time Arafat really, really, really means it and will clamp down on terrorists. Arafat’s links to terror are solid, documented in writing, but the euros and others who lack acuity may be forgiven for confusing him with the Palestinian cause. OK, willfully blind, but still not evil.
One would need to be evil, a party to terror, to ignore the Syrian contribution to terrorism. It is one thing to deal with evil regimes; quite another to engage with them as equals. This has nothing to do with national pride. It has to do with the nature of a multinational organization, the U.N, that affords such a venue to trash states such as Syria, the Sudan, Libya, not to mention holes-in-the-wall around the globe with fewer people (not to mention fewer working toilets) than Cleveland, Ohio. The United Nations, born in a rush of post-World War II bonhomie, has at best become an anachronism. In reality, it has become an impediment to the spread of democracy, freedom, and free markets.
The United States should make whatever multilateral arrangements it needs to in order to accomplish its objectives, or go it alone with our British cousins if need be. The objective is, trite but true, to make the world safe for democracy. It is past obscene to even attempt to do so in the context of an organization that has a toilet-bowl nation like Syria (no, not a shitty little country; it doesn't rate that highly) on its governing security council.
The U.S. should opt out of the U.N.; it has become an impediment to freedom.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home