Omar Bin Laden, news reports tell us, would like a job at the U.N. This isn’t a case of someone wishing to further terrorism. By all accounts, he does not approve of his famous father.
But that is not the only reason to give Omar Bin Laden a job at the U.N. In fact, it would clarify matters considerably if Omar Bin Laden, who remains a Muslim, if not nearly as fanatical and violent a Muslim as his father, were to be given the post of Secretary General. No Muslim has yet held that post. Isn’t it time?
It would be perfect.
Consider the last few Secretaries-General of the U.N.
One recent Secretary-General was the Nazi war criminal Kurt Waldheim, who took part in Operation Kozara in Yugoslavia, and was present at the Aktion, the round-up, of Jews in Salonika, Greece, and in many atrocities, especially near the war’s end.
And then there was the Egyptian Boutros Boutros Ghali, who was a Copt (with a Jewish wife), who even socialized with the likes of Abe Rosenthal (and revealed, through melancholy hints, what he could never dare say publicly) but one who (like his wife) had so thoroughly internalized the role of dhimmi, that although he was well aware of what Islam is all about, he did nothing to stop the burrowing into every interstice of the U.N.’s bureaucracy by agents — both Muslim and non-Muslim — of the Muslim bloc, the only remaining bloc at the U.N..
There was Kofi Annan, whom that Muslim bloc manipulated every which way but up, and managed to make sure that his Chief Speechwriter (and “Senior Adviser”) was a stout defender of Islam, one Edward Mortimer, a man whom some older people in England remember as having been in Teheran and who hailed the triumphant return to Iran of the Ayatollah Khomeini.
Here’s what I wrote at Jihad Watch in my “Tribute to Edward Mortimer” (January 19, 2006):
The Director of Communications at the U.N. and Kofi Annan’s Chief Speechwriter (and also his “Senior Adviser”) is one Edward Mortimer, formerly with the Euro-Arab Dialogue branch of the E.U., and before that, a journalist with a variety of English newspapers. He is most famous, among those who remember what he wishes they would forget, for the absolute delight with which he greeted that primitive pro-fascist mass-murderer, the Ayatollah Khomeini, the man who in his writings carefully explains to whom it is licit to serve the cooked remains of a goat, a camel, a sheep with which you have had sexual intercourse and then killed and cooked. That allows one to deal with that famous problem immortalized in song — “breaking-up-is-hard-to-do” — and at the same time thriftily observing the ethic of “waste not, want not.” And then, of course, there are the Ayatollah’s remarks on the absolute necessity of making war on the Infidels (see, for bloodthirsty samples, Ibn Warraq’s Why I Am Not a Muslim, pp 11-12, and Robert Spencer’s Islam Unveiled, p. 35).
Here is what Edward Mortimer, the man who puts the words in Kofi Annan’s mouth and therefore helps to mold what pass for Kofi Annan’s “thoughts,” wrote when the Ayatollah Khomeini first came to power, as reported by the English writer Anthony Howard:
Way back at the start of 1979, when the Iranian people took to the streets and the late Shah was overthrown, the media – as I recall – did not so much give a shudder of horror as heave a sigh of relief. Indeed, one London periodical (the ultra-respectable, middle-of-the-road Spectator) went almost overboard in its exultation. Writing from Teheran, one of its contributors, Mr. Edward Mortimer of The Times of London, actually went so far as to begin his article with Charles James Fox’s comment on the fall of the Bastille: ”How much the greatest event it is that ever happened in the world, and how much the best!” Those words, added Mr. Mortimer, seemed to him ”entirely apposite.”
That is Mortimer on Khomeini’s resistible rise: “How much the greatest event it is that ever happened in the world, and how much the best” are words, he wrote, that seemed to him “entirely apposite.”
Let’s repeat that one more time: That is Mortimer on Khomeini’s resistible rise: “How much the greatest event it is that ever happened in the world, and how much the best” are words, he wrote, that seemed to him “entirely apposite.”
And not surprisingly, Mortimer is venomous on the subject of Israel. Now the real antisemites, as is known, have a few topics that they cannot leave alone, that haunt them, that they love to discuss endlessly. For some, it may be the supposedly “deliberate” attack by Israeli planes on the U.S.S. Liberty in June 1967 — despite the careful analyses and now the released tapes that show conclusively that it was, of course, a mistake, friendly fire of the most understandable kind. (This does not prevent the likes of James Bamford in one of his books from claiming, without the least evidence, that Israel did this in order to “cover up” its crimes of executing Egyptian prisoners — but then Bamford, of course, is the kind of man who pretends to be a tough, no-nonsense clear-eyed defender of America while opposing efforts to wiretap violent jihadists and insisting that there is no problem with Islam or a Jihad, no, of course not — the problem is America’s unreserved and total (!) “support of Israel.” Tell that to the Christians in East Timor or the Southern Sudan.
Now there is one other favorite topos of the convinced antisemite. And that is that the “Zionists” collaborated with — the Nazis. This nauseating charge is made, in fact, by among others, one Lenni Brenner. No serious reviewer would bother with such trash. But Edward Mortimer found the thesis of a Zionist-Nazi collaboration so convincing, so meritorious, that he wrote a rave review that was then used as the introduction for a new edition of the book. That tells one all one needs to know about Edward Mortimer’s deepest impulses, and not only when it comes to Israel.
So this is the man who, though he had praised Khomeini to the Jacobin skies back in 1979, and heaped praise on Lonni Brenner’s antisemitic viciousness back in 1984, was hired nonetheless — no, make that “was hired for that reason” — by the United Nations. It is Edward Mortimer who puts the “twaddle” in Kofi Annan’s mouth — the mouth of the man who heads an organization that has been taken over by the Islamintern. Edward Mortimer deserves the U.N.; the U.N. deserves Edward Mortimer. What a mix, what a continuous Witches’ Sabbath on the East River.
Meanwhile, a million black Christians in southern Nigeria died, many of them killed by Egyptian pilots bombing civilians — and the U.N. did nothing. The U.N. did nothing when 200,000 Christians in East Timor died; it was the Australians who had to rescue the rest with their own troops. In 20 years of genocidal attacks, the U.N. has done nothing effective to help the Christians of the southern Sudan, despite the superb and anguished reports of its Special Rapporteur Gaspar Biro. Kofi Annan went out of his way to prevent General Romeo Dalaire from acting to intervene and head off the Rwanda Genocide. The Hutus, incidentally, had earlier received arms from Egypt; at the time, the Secretary-General was the sad-eyed Boutros Boutros Ghali, a man deeply afraid of the Egyptian Government. Kofi Annan was in charge of peacekeeping.
The ongoing discussions about Darfur are farcical. The U.N. will not and cannot act, because the Arab League, and many other Muslim countries, will simply not permit any intervention to save either non-Muslims or non-Arab Muslims when they are under attack by Muslim Arabs. Only against Iraq, in the past 30 years, has the U.N. authorized military force against a Muslim power. And it was not to rescue the Kurds during the Al-Anfal Operation against them. No, it was only in response to the invasion of Kuwait and the threatened invasion of Saudi Arabia — for then other Muslim powers were directly threatened. And the resolutions left over from the end of that first Gulf War were the only reason the United States obtained some half-hearted backing this time around.
But unless it is other Muslims who are being threatened, the U.N. will never, ever, take the side of intervention. It has been thoroughly infiltrated by pro-Islamic, and anti-Israel and anti-American forces. And Edward Mortimer beautifully exemplifies all three strands. He deserves special attention and no doubt a special prize from Muslim sources — for efforts that surpass even what they expected.
Well done, Edward Mortimer. Well done, illegitimate Edward.
In fact, should not Edward Mortimer have been invited to the Dallas shindig last year that celebrated the Works and Days of the Ayatollah Khomeini, so as to have leant it a certain false olde-worlde charm, and given it the benefit of that pseudo-plummy voice, brimming with self-confidence, and all the rest of what Edward Mortimer has to offer — which is what, exactly?
And now, after the Nazi, and the dhimmi, and the dope, we are up to the man who seems to come from a different planet – Ban Ki-Moon. Ban Ki-Moon knows nothing about Islam, but he knows his U.N., knows the power of the Muslim bloc. He is not well prepared either about Islam or about such matters as the Jihad against Israel. He is completely surrounded by those who over many decades have set the agenda, fine-tuned the tone, and chosen the bureaucrats and special rapporteurs of every kind. They have managed to make the U.N. focus obsessive attention on Israel and its supposed misdeeds, and equally obsessive attention on the “plight of the Palestinians.” Upon the latter more than one-third of the U.N.’s time, and fully one-half of all the aid the U.N. makes available to all of the hundreds of millions of refugees who exist worldwide, are lavished. Ban Ki-moon, though he is not a Nazi, not a dhimmi, not quite a dope, is nonetheless a creature of that world, the world created by Muslim power and propaganda, not least at the U.N.
So let’s cut out the middlemen. Let’s cut right to the chase. The Muslim voting bloc is the only remaining bloc, and Muslims completely dominate the agenda set at the U.N. They can be seen hard at work not only in New York but, most notably, in Geneva at meetings of the comical kangaroo court. Israel keeps being hung, and then the corpse cut down and revived, so that the trial, conviction, and hanging can take place all over again – and this process is repeated ad libitum and, for the decent of this world, in the deepest sense, ad nauseam. Muslims really do run things at the U.N. I want the world, and especially the advanced world of North America and Europe, or at least its peoples, to see exactly what the U.N. has turned into, without the faÃ§ade behind which the Muslim operatives at the U.N. perform their by-now not-so-secret ministry, carry out their sinister work in promoting, and also in disguising, every one of their local Jihads whose sum is simply the worldwide Jihad those origin, and scope, even now, so few Infidels truly understand.