#WTH: The UN upgrades "Palestine"; Biden draws a red line vs Israel

These are the fruits of antisemitism

Syrian child Alan Kurdi, dead on a Mediterranean beach. A product of Biden’s “humanity.”

NOTE: My apologies for resending this post. I mistakenly sent a “paid” post to all of our beloved readers. My apologies for the spam, and for my tech incompetence. D

Two news items today, and the thread that binds them:

The U.N. General Assembly will likely vote on Friday to confer rights synonymous with statehood to a “state of Palestine” within the global body. The General Assembly doesn’t have the right under the U.N. charter to make “Palestine” a full member — only the Security Council has that right. But after the United States’ recent veto of a Security Council effort to do just that, the UNGA took up the reins to get “Palestine” — the Palestinian Authority and, maybe, Hamas — just a bit closer.

Here, in the latest draft, is the critical section of the UNGA resolution:

Decides, on an exceptional basis and without setting a precedent, to adopt the modalities set out in the annex to the present resolution for the participation of the State of Palestine in the sessions and work of the General Assembly and the international conferences convened under the auspices of the Assembly

There are a few problems (she said, with elegant understatement) with this step, which clearly confers the privileges of statehood. First is, uh, what is Palestine? Is it Ramallah? Gaza? Fatah and the PA President Mahmoud Abbas? But what about Gaza, where the PA is not sovereign? What about Hamas? As my United Nations guru, Brett Schaefer of the Heritage Foundation, wrote when UNESCO chose to admit a “state of Palestine,”

Palestine lacks the characteristics of a state long recognized under customary international law. These principles are concisely stated in Article I of the 1933 Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States: “The state as a person of international law should possess the following qualifications: a ) a permanent population; b ) a defined territory; c ) government; and d) capacity to enter into relations with the other states.”

Then there is the fact that part of “Palestine” is run by a terrorist organization, normally an insuperable bar to meet the United Nations qualifications (“peace-loving”) for statehood. But more critically for all friends and fans of the United Nations, and much like UNESCO’s 2011 call to admit “Palestine,” such a step must result in a cut off of all U.S. funding to the United Nations and any U.N. agency that admits “Palestine.”

The relevant statutes (Section 410 of P.L. 103- 236 and Section 414 of P.L. 101-246) state:

“No funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act or any other Act shall be available for the United Nations or any specialized agency thereof which accords the Palestine Liberation Organization [PLO] the same standing as member states.”

and…

“The United States shall not make any voluntary or assessed contribution: (1) to any affiliated organization of the United Nations which grants full membership as a state to any organization or group that does not have the internationally recognized attributes of statehood, or (2) to the United Nations, if the United Nations grants full membership as a state in the United Nations to any organization or group that does not have the internationally recognized attributes of statehood, during any period in which such membership is effective.”

Neither of these provisions includes a waiver.

Before anyone leaps up to note that the PLO is not the “State of Palestine,” actually, it is. The PLO is recognized by the United Nations as the “sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people.” And don’t try to leap a second time: The US government is in the same legal position, and accordingly in 2011 cut off assistance to UNESCO. One last little note on this: If “Palestine” is the PLO, and the PLO is the PA, then theoretically, the PA could be recognized as the party being granted the privileges of statehood. But no one can argue that the PA represents Gaza at this point. So is the U.N. admitting the West Bank only?

Now, on to Rafah.

Our esteemed Commander in Chief granted a rare sit down interview with CNN this week, and said:

“I made it clear that if they go into Rafah – they haven’t gone in Rafah yet – if they go into Rafah, I’m not supplying the weapons that have been used historically to deal with Rafah, to deal with the cities – that deal with that problem.”

This is a reversal of Biden’s repeated commitment not to slow roll weaponry to Israel, and a change in the heretofore announced policy of the United States. So, two questions: Did Biden mean to say what he did and upend his own policy? Or is he confused?

This would not be the first time our confused leader articulated a policy (“defend Taiwan”) that was not actually, you know, policy. But in those instances, the White House was quick to walk his statements back. No such reversal has yet come from Team Biden.

The willingness of the president’s staff to agree with the president’s words (truly, what the hell?) is likely a product of the same disgraceful moral equivalence that stopped the president from condemning the naked antisemitism on college campuses: His party is increasingly dominated by antisemites and Israel-haters, and the president needs their vote in November. Why the president is catering to the minority of his party — because the majority is pro-Israel — is also clear: Every marginal vote counts. He who stays home, votes, in effect, for Donald Trump.

I summarized my attitude about the unprincipled nature of Biden’s announcement on twitter (X):

Many have expressed the same sentiments, but let’s just review the bidding on @JoeBiden’s foreign policy principles. Tens of billions to Iran while VP. Arms to Saudi to fight Yemen while VP. The betrayal of the Syrian people & sell out to Russia as VP. 1/

The betrayal of the Ukrainian people as VP in 2014. The betrayal of Iraq in. 2011. The betrayal of Afghanistan to the Taliban as President. The deliberate facilitation of Iranian oil sales to China. The slow rolling of arms to Ukraine. The rehabilitation of Venezuela. 2/

But arming Israel to defeat a terrorist organization that holds American hostages, that has killed Americans, and that seeks to annihilate all of Israel - that’s a bloody red line? How can any self respecting American patriot & lover of democracy not be ashamed by this man?

Let’s be crystal clear here: Joe Biden has strengthened Russia, China, and Iran as VP and President. He, with his old boss, ignored a “red line” of their own drawing and allowed repeated chemical weapons attacks against the Syrian people. But now he’s a man? Now he wants to stand up for “humanity.”

Last word:

What is the thread that binds these actions? Let’s look at the IHRA definition of antisemitism: “Applying double standards by requiring of [Israel] a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation.”

The United Nations is elevating “Palestine” and rewarding the attacks of October 7 because of Jew hatred. Joe Biden is stopping arms to Israel — not to Saudi Arabia, not to Qatar — to satisfy Jew haters he hopes will vote for him. It’s gross to say, grosser to believe, but it is true.