Antonio Guterres is not the worst Secretary-General in the history of the United Nations. No, that distinction belongs to the Nazi war criminal Kurt Waldheim, who took part in the aktion in Salonika, where all of the city’s Jewish men and boys were rounded up, made to stand all day in the scorching son in the city’s main square, before being sent to a death camp. Waldheim also served in the roundup of Jews in southern Greece, took part in the savage reprisals against partisans, in units distinguished for the atrocities they committed. Later on, Waldheim would claim never to have been present at any of these campaigns, insisting that he always happened to be away on leave whenever these atrocities took place, though there are photographs of him with his fellow Nazis, including at least two of his commanders who would later be declared to be war criminals. No, Antonio Guterres is not in Waldheim’s league. But his latest speech to the UN Security Council certainly disqualifies him to continue as Secretary-General. He has no sense of shame; he is morally obtuse. He won’t resign. But he should.
The complete text of Guterres’ speech on Israel’s war in Gaza has apparently been removed, but here it is, with my comments interpolated throughout:
Mr. President, with your permission, I will make a small introduction and then ask my colleagues to brief the Security Council on the situation on the ground.
Excellencies,
The situation in the Middle East is growing more dire by the hour.
No, it is the situation of Hamas in Gaza that is “growing more dire by the hour.” In the rest of the Middle East it’s the mixture as before, save in Israel where, after the torture, rape, and murder of so many of its citizens, the fight for the Jewish state’s survival continues. Israel’s situation is difficult, but not “dire” — the 300,000 citizen-soldiers of Israel will, as they have in Israel’s three previous wars of survival (1948, 1967, 1973) prove equal to the task.
The war in Gaza is raging and risks spiralling throughout the region.
For all the talk about the violence “spiralling throughout the region,” it hasn’t happened. A few rockets were hurled toward Israel by the Houthis in Yemen, but were promptly shot down by the Americans manning a ship in the Red Sea.
Divisions are splintering societies. Tensions threaten to boil over.
What “divisions” are these that are “splintering societies”? The Israelis have never been so united. When the hurly-burly’s done, and the battle’s lost (by Hamas) and won (by Israel), there will be time for Israelis return to arguing over the judicial reform. But for now, the Jews of Israel are like one clenched fist hammering at Hamas.
Hamas, too, enjoys the support not only of most of the Gazans, but of the Palestinians in the West Bank. There are no “divisions” among the Palestinians as there are not among the Israelis. Guterres has misread the situation.
When Guterres mentions that “tensions threaten to boil over,” I would have thought that he might have recognized that “tensions don’t ‘threaten’ to boil over” in the future; they are already in a rolling boil that began on October 7, when Hamas murderers rampaged through the kibbutzim on the Gaza border, decapitating babies, burning children alive, raping and murdering young girls, torturing, mutilating (eyes gouged out, genitals cut off), and beheading IDF soldiers.
At a crucial moment like this, it is vital to be clear on principles — starting with the fundamental principle of respecting and protecting civilians.
It is Hamas that always and everywhere tries to murder Israeli civilians. And it is Hamas that deliberately places Palestinian civilians in danger by placing its weapons, rocket launchers, command-and-control centers, and operatives in or near civilian buildings, including schools, apartment buildings, hospitals, and mosques. It is the IDF that, while fighting Hamas and other terror groups, does everything it can to “respect and protect civilians” by warning them away from targets that are soon to be struck, by messaging, telephoning, leafletting, and use of the “knock-on-the-roof” technique. Israeli pilots, too, even call off their own missions if they detect too many civilians near the target. Does Antonio Guterres know about those efforts? Does he understand that Israel always tries to minimize civilian casualties, while Hamas tries always to maximize them?
Kalit says
His intellectual and political mediocrity make him perfect for an age in which nonsense is viewed as sacramental.
࿗Infidel࿘ says
Aside from Waldheim’s record as a war criminal, when he ran the UN, was the UN as rabidly anti-Israel the way it was since the 90s, whether under Boutros Boutros-Ghali, Kofi Anan or Ban Ki-moon? Waldheim ran things from 1972-81, and during that era, from what I recall, the UN usually voted along bloc lines on Israel, w/ the Communist bloc and the so-called “Non-Aligned Movement” voting against Israel, and the entire Western bloc either supporting Israel or abstaining. At least from what I recall, Kofi Annan was the worst leader the UN ever had, surpassing even Butros-Ghali
Wellington says
Sound points, Infidel. And I am inclined to agree with you about Kofi Annan—though it’s a close call and reasonable minds can differ about an organization in the UN which is despicable to its core.
Basically from the start, UN Secretary-Generals have been pathetic, for instance the 3rd Secretary-General, Dag Hammarskjoid, whom JFK foolishly called “the greatest statesman of our century.”
As Paul Johnson in his monumental work, Modern Times, details, Hammarskjoid, excused evil and which the UN has ben “consistent” with after getting one thing right by sanctioning intervention in Korea in 1950. Since then, the UN has been all downhill and why all decent nations (or what’s left of them) need to pull out of the UN once and for all.
Westman says
How about just moving the UN to an appropriate location like Iran and stop funding it? Serious Western nations will drop out and the grifters on our dime will go broke and stay home. The remainder can make accusatory addresses to each other and do, essentially, nothing.
Perry Ackerman says
In the early ’80’s I drove a Yellow Cab in NYC. The UN had a space reserved for Taxi parking.
Couple of times a week I’d park, briefly use the men’s room and have breakfast in the cafeteria. Used a payphone to call my wife, and go back to work.
Forty years later I reflect and still can’t think of any other useful function the UN has ever served that favored American citizens.
somehistory says
OT
Interesting stats…from the FBI about hate crimes, increasing against Whites and fewer against Blacks.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/anti-white-hate-crimes-skyrocket-after-blm/ar-AA1j0l9t?ocid=msedgntp&pc=HCTS&cvid=2c5999bb09c347c49ce3b93a65b0fd8e&ei=57
OLD GUY says
That’s the new future. Our open border illegal migration is bring a huge influx of non white people into our society.
From The Other Side of Town says
It is not about the pigmentation, it is about whether or not migrating peoples have something to contribute to the US, whether they are able to stand on their own two feet, and whether they are honest decent folk.
Most immigrant groups have been looked upon in their first arrival here: the Irish, the African, the Scots, the Norwegian, the Chinese, Japanese, etc. Maybe we can by-pass this distractor and move directly to the point: close the borders, evaluate all immigration requests before -not after, or as we are currently experiencing-r not at all- before entry.
oren says
I cant believe the former secretary general of the UN participated in mass murder and death squads. He got out of it saying he did not go to work on the days that those atrocities were committed? How would he have known? Wouldn’t he have been found out? I imagine you are not selected for death squad duty, unless you are a wild supporter of such actions. The two mass murder and Jew roundup campaigns he claimed to not be a part of, would have taken weeks, probably months, not a sick day or vacation day if the nazis gave those to soldiers.
I suppose people were not informed of his actions when he was secretary general, or the president of Austria? Or perhaps they didn’t care, or they deceived themselves. People believed the media in vast numbers back then, but I really feel I dont have a handle on what type of numbers we are looking at for Jew haters in the west, how much seething anger there is for them. He got elected president of Austria, so he had majority support, or close to it, if they follow that coalition vote system. It would seem likely that it would be news that he participated in mass murder, if the media printed those stories anywhere, at all. Even if only 30% of western people are anti racist, and or Jew friendly, I think it would have been a heck of a story, with plenty of people offended. I supported Bush jr, I didn’t hear about his families nazi connections till years later.
Which raises the question as to who the heck are the people in charge of us, and how useless and controlled is the media? The answer appears to be the media is very undependable. They seem to follow popularity, and initiatives when they come down the pipe. Why elect a nazi, and then cover up that he is a nazi? Maybe the nazis are still around, they have more power than the people in charge want to admit, so they bide their time, till the cycle of belief in equality of all people ends, like it has so many times before. Perhaps the nazis are the government? Could be, but if they were trying to conceal themselves, then why elect a nazi. Perhaps it was a test to see how awake people were, and to see how powerful the media was, able to conceal anything, and therefore able to do anything. Bad news. In G-d I trust.
Waring factions, with the nazis being one group? Maybe. The only thing that seems certain, is that nazis exist, and are powerful, otherwise the world media wouldn’t cover up for them.