| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Jihad Watch | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Raymond Ibrahim | Robert Spencer |  |
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
Anne Bayefsky writes, "On April 10th the UN Disarmament Commission elected Iran as one of its three Vice-Chairpersons. Afterwards, the UN's Under Secretary-General for Disarmament Affairs, Nobuaki Tanaka, said the Commission "played a unique role" with "the advantage of being a fully universal deliberative body."" And from IsraelNationalNews, "Iran Threatens to Destroy Israel, Elected to UN Commission," with thanks to RB.
Iran's leaders have reiterated their call for Israel's annihilation, announcing the advancement of the Iranian nuclear program, and winning a seat on the United Nations' Disarmament Commission.Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad reiterated Iran's goal of "wiping Israel off the map." Speaking at a conference of visiting heads of Arab terrorist groups operating in areas under Palestinian Authority control, Ahmadinejad said, "Whether you like it or not, the Zionist regime is on the road to being eliminated."
Once again expressing his doubt as to whether the Holocaust happened, Ahmadinejad said that, although the Holocaust’s occurrence is "open to doubt, there is no doubt about the holocaust being carried out [by Israel] against the Palestinians." He went on to call upon Israelis to return to the countries from which their ancestors emigrated. "I tell the governments who support Zionism to allow the migrants [to] return to their countries of origin. If you think you owe them something [because of the Holocaust], give them some of your land," he said. "The Zionist regime is a rotten, dried tree that will be eliminated by one storm."
Ahmadinejad announced last Tuesday that Iran had successfully enriched uranium in order to produce nuclear fuel, in violation of a call by the UN Security Council for Iran to end the project.
The day before, the UN's Disarmament Commission elected Iran's Mehdi Danesh-Yazdi as one of its three vice-chairs. "The continued existence of thousands of nuclear warheads in the stockpiles of the nuclear-weapon States, which could destroy the entire globe many times over, and the increasing resort to the threat of their possible use, are the major sources of concern with regard to global peace and security," Danesh-Yazdi said, adding that Israel was required to place all of its "clandestine nuclear facilities" under UN nuclear watchdog supervision.
Jordan's representative added that Israel's refusal to renounce nuclear weapons is a major source of tensions in the Middle East...
Posted by Rebecca at April 16, 2006 10:03 AM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
'Jordan's representative added that Israel's refusal to renounce nuclear weapons is a major source of tensions in the Middle East...'
Yes. It must be very upsetting to not be able to stomp a people who are only 1% the size of their entire faith.
Posted by: Gary![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/nav-commenters.gif)
at April 16, 2006 10:32 AM
The Persian “Aryans” have spoken. There was no German Aryan holocaust. If the Persian "Iranians" annihilate the Jewish race, it will be no holocaust either.
Posted by Frank:
"(had we)been converted to Mohammedanism, that cult which glorifies the heroism and which opens up the seventh Heaven to the bold warrior alone, then the Germanic races would have conquered the world." Adolph Hitler.
Posted by: David England at April 16, 2006 10:43 AM
Another "You couldn't make this stuff up" moment.
Posted by: Paolo at April 16, 2006 11:18 AM
In the words of the prophet MO (Howard) of the Trinity, Mo, Larry & Curly (pbuh):
"Knuckleheads!"
Posted by: profitsbeard at April 16, 2006 11:46 AM
I believe the world is in its worst situation since pre-WWI.
The League of Nations is looking quite inviting at this point.
The EU and UN are not only ineffctive, but de jure advocates of genocide. What could be worse? Russia and China helping the process along.
Posted by: Beagle at April 16, 2006 12:17 PM
Who takes the UN seriously anyway? Except from European governments, ofcourse :P
Posted by: DrWolffenstein at April 16, 2006 1:20 PM
Why are we suprised? What do we expect elected committees, conventions, membership appointments, committee rotations, and commission reports of the United Nations today to read when we give thirty votes to Islamic nations each of which was has never had a democratic government or a democratic election? This is why Iran gets this type of appointment or the U.N. human rights commission has been headed up by Libya, Syria and others. This is why the U.N. can only agree on one thing that Zionism is terrorism and racism. Throw out U.N. members who are not democratically elected. Why give a vote to those whose only claim to vote is that they were violent, corrupt and deceitful enough to murder and mayhem and dominate and control a modern cesspool country? Throw out these scoundrel members or shut the U.N. down. This esteemed body has already set in motion a process to criminalize, sanction and punish the leaders of the U.K., U.S., Israel and others as war criminals for overthrowing the charitable humanist and prior member Sadaam Hussein (after all his largesse to U.N. administrative leaders and other member who showed Hussein appropriate loyalty in vouching for him) and other kindred corrupt criminals who keep power in unimaginably despicable ways. The U.N. legitimizes some of the worst ills in the modern world. Why do we give more than one vote to the Caliphate?
Posted by: David England at April 16, 2006 1:43 PM
Giving Iran a seat on the UN Disarmament Commission is like giving Sudan, Syria, Libya, Cuba et al seats on the UN Human Rights Council, formely Commission. That is, par for the internationalist course.
Posted by: scaramouoche at April 16, 2006 3:31 PM
Are these assigned alphabetically? If yes, next month, Rebecca can write the same article, substituting Iraq for Iran.
Now that Iran is the chair, look forward to the UN Disarmament Commission demanding that the US, Israel and UK disarm, followed by other infidel countries like India (whom Iran very generously offered to supply gas via a pipeline through Pakistan.)
All these jokes about the UN are worth their own hadith.
Posted by: Infidel Pride at April 16, 2006 4:57 PM
David England sez:
"...Throw out U.N. members who are not democratically elected. Why give a vote to those whose only claim to vote is that they were violent, corrupt and deceitful enough to murder and mayhem and dominate and control a modern cesspool country?"
According to that we would have to deal with Hamas. We would also have to deal with the Muslim brotherhood in Algeria, Egypt, Jordan, Syria (?) Afghanistan, Pakistan, Indonesia (?)
Seriously:
Most, if not all of these places would vote one time, and they would vote for Islam. Then what?
So for the next decade you would still be better off with the 'plucky little King' in Jordan, with a dictator in Egypt, with the military preventing a Muslim-brother-takeover in Algeria.
None of these countries should be taken seriously. None of these countries should have a say in how we are to conduct our affairs.
The 'Ummah' should have only one voice, but in the security council?
at April 16, 2006 5:20 PM
I've said it here before and I'll repeat it until I turn blue. We need to get out of the UN (Useless Nations), and get someone with backbone in the White House. We need a new organization of nations that includes at least two other true democracies and form something else. This of course will not include the Islamic pseudo-democracies like Afghanistan. I think that the US, India, Israel, and Japan would be a good start. If the Japanese can be made to understand just how the Muslims would treat Buddhist and Shintoists they might join. The Hindus should understand this; the Muslim bloodletting in 1948 is a good reminder. We also need to make the Chinese understand that an Islamic victory means that there will be no Western consumers with any money to buy their exports. Our military intervention in Yugoslavia spoiled our relationship with Russia for many years to come. The next President should explain just how short sighted we were.
But, I realize that none of this will ever happen until we finally use up every drop of Arab oil. Hey - "Arabhouse Oil, Good to the Last Drop."
at April 16, 2006 8:30 PM
geesh if we get rid of the UN, what will the US democrats ie, Kennedy, Kerry, Clinton cling to! l mean a lot of libeals would lose their best friends!
Jimmy Carter just loves rubbing elbows with the UN elites! you know how the UN harbours terrorist nations, when BinLaden chose the Twin Towers over the UN buildings! Terrorist nows about a terrorist hangout, the UN!
at April 16, 2006 9:24 PM
Just when you think the United Nothing has reached the pinnacle of wretched incompetence and corruption, it only gets worse. Why does the U.S. tolerate and finance this asinine assembly of pompous imbeciles?
Posted by: Susanp at April 16, 2006 11:32 PM
The UN serves only one actual purpose. As a Leftist clearinghouse for nations to triangulate against the US. Rather than oversee human rights around the globe, as was its mandate in 1946, the UN today is nothing more than a political body, led by corrupt Africans, making deals with corrupt Islamics, with the assistance of corrupt Russian and corruption Chinese governments, none of whom have any interest in human rights. The UN today serves exactly the opposite purpose for which it was founded.
Posted by: thethinker at April 16, 2006 11:57 PM
David E quotes Hitler's praise of Islam above. In fact Hitler directly discussed jihad with a Muslim theologian, `Inayat Khan, who was an Indian Muslim and an advocate of the Pakistan idea. See link:
http://ziontruth.blogspot.com/2006/01/islamic-influence-on-hitler-can-it-be.html
at April 17, 2006 8:06 AM
Infidel Pride:
Israel has never been allowed to take up any significant positions in the UN even though it has been Israel's "turn" many times. The usual suspects always block the process with objections. The same usual suspects also support putting Libya and other failed Muslim states into key positions.
Posted by: waterdragon52 at April 17, 2006 9:30 AM
The UN has no moral authority and it should be seen --must be seen-- to have no moral authority. It is a dangerous entity. If Bush wants to save money for America, he can stop the UN subsidies after stopping those to Egypt, the palestinian authority, Saudi Arabia, etc.
Posted by: Eliyahu at April 17, 2006 10:50 AM
of course iran wants the jews to tell were they keep there nukes the better to destoy them befor there used but of couse iran has no nukes its not a nucular weapon untill you put the trigger in it so when they say that there not makeing nucular bombs thirs technacly right
Posted by: va7gpd at April 18, 2006 5:07 AM
Wait a minute..
Isnt this the same Useless UN that
Swore Iran didnt have any nukes
Swore Iraq was telling the truth about wmds
Swore that sudan could be trusted with darfur
Swore that lybia didnt have anything to do with the locerbee bombing?
Now they put IRAN in charge of weapons inspections...
Who arranged this?
Jimmy the peanut farmer Carter?
Posted by: jingoist at April 19, 2006 12:04 AM
(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)