United Kingdom’s Home Grown Terrorism, Abroad

One of the sessions at the United Nations Conference on Counter-Terrorism in June 2023 was called “Building Effective and Resilient Member States’ Institutions in the Evolving Global Terrorism Landscape.” One of the speakers, Colin Smith from the United Kingdom, spoke (44:35) of the changing landscape of terrorism over the past twenty years and covered:

  • a focus on al Qaeda 20 years ago versus local terrorist groups today
  • a secretive counter-terrorism community vs. an open forum where countries share information and resources
  • immature counter-terrorism agencies vs. more sophisticated organizations
  • centers of terrorism vs. geographically diffuse operations now

Smith said “Since 2018, there’ve been nine successful terrorist attacks in the UK and one failed attack but none of them were directed from overseas. They were all self-initiated terrorists. So an individual or perhaps a small group getting together being radicalized by what they saw online or what they heard and turning to a terrorist attack in perhaps a very short of time, perhaps radicalizing in weeks, and not in months or years; perhaps days or weeks. Very low sophistication attacks using knives and cars. So since 2018, there have nine such attacks killing six people and injuring 23 in the UK but we’ve had no externally-directed attacks. In fact, the last time there was an externally successful attack in the UK was back in 2005.”

It begs the question as to the nature of home-grown terrorism in the UK since 2005.

Colin Smith of the United Kingdom talking at the United Nations counter-terrorism conference in June 2023

A quick review of some of the attacks:

Quite a heavy toll between 2005 and 2018, and certainly more violent than only “using knives and cars.”

Smith’s UN comments were seemingly dismissive of the news when he said that the attackers were “radicalized by what they saw online or what they heard,” making it sound like the attackers were being fed disinformation and preyed upon. However, it was a well known and reported fact that the United Kingdom participated in fighting Al Qaeda and ISIL. The British Muslims who committed the terrorist attacks simply showed a greater love for co-religionists than for their fellow citizens whom they saw as co-conspirators killing Muslims.

Smith highlighted that the UK published a counter-terrorism document called CONTEST in 2018. Importantly for the UN conference, he spoke of the broad coordination happening amongst different agencies and the public sector to combat terrorism holistically, as called for in the report.

Yet he avoided discussing that between 2013 and the 2018 counterterrorism report, British police “foiled 25 Islamist plots since June 2013, and four extreme right wing terror plots in the past year alone…. The war in Syria, which was in its infancy when the last Strategy was published, has created both a haven and a training ground for British and foreign terrorists. UK citizens have been targeted in attacks overseas, for example in Sousse in 2015,” when 30 British tourists were killed in Tunisia.

The CONTEST publication was explicit about the serious threats facing the UK: “Daesh’s ability to direct, enable and inspire attacks still represents the most significant global terrorist threat, including to the UK and our people and interests overseas. Daesh’s methods are already being copied by new and established terror groups. Using pernicious, divisive messaging and amplifying perceived grievances, Daesh and Al Qa’ida exploit the internet to promote warped alternative narratives, urging extremists within our own communities to subvert our way of life through simple, brutal violence.”

In the setting of the United Nations panel, Smith avoided mentioning Islamic extremism, despite being the root cause of the British developing its comprehensive counterterrorism strategy. He alluded to disinformation, rather than point out that terrorists had grievances about actual facts. He did not discuss the end of British troops fighting in Iraq, Syria and Afghanistan (or at least the media covering such events) as cause for the pause in jihadists killing British citizens in recent years.

Significantly, Smith also did not talk about the United Kingdom’s refusal to repatriate perhaps as many as 400 British citizens back to its shores after fighting alongside terrorist groups in Syria and Iraq.

CONTEST was explicit, writing “Daesh’s initial state-building narrative persuaded thousands of people, including women and families, to travel to Syria from around the world, including from Europe and North Africa. This includes around 900 people of national security concern from the UK. Of these, approximately 20% have been killed while overseas, and around 40% have returned to the UK. The majority of those who have returned did so in the earlier stages of the conflict, and were investigated on their return. Only a very small number of travellers have returned in the last two years, and most of those have been women with young children.” That leaves 40% of the 900, or about 350 Britons still abroad as of 2018.

In regards to children still overseas, as of April 2023, as many as “60 British children are believed to be detained in al-Hol and Roj, two sprawling detention camps in northeast Syria primarily holding family members of Islamic State (ISIS) suspects” according to Human Rights Watch. Those children are among 37,000 foreign nationals held in the camps who are being refused re-entry into their home countries, many of whom have been stripped of their citizenship.

The UK published its goals of reintegrating returnees from the conflict in CONTEST, noting that its Desistance and Disengagement Programme (DDP) was “to reduce the risk from terrorism through rehabilitation and reintegration… will aim to more than double its current capacity to accommodate up to 230 individuals…. Through the DDP, we provide a range of
intensive tailored interventions and practical support, designed to tackle the drivers of radicalisation around universal needs for identity, self-esteem, meaning and purpose; as well as to address personal grievances that the extremist narrative has exacerbated.” It was unclear whether addressing the terrorist’s grievances meant discussing why the UK fought ISIL or changing policy and having the UK abandon the fight.

Further, if there were still as many as 60 British children held in detention camps in Syria as of April 2023, it stands to reason that the UK has left almost all of the 350 adults in the camps as well, repatriating no one.

CONTEST also spoke of the government’s intention of pursuing would-be terrorists “including covert human intelligence sources, surveillance assets and the lawful intercept of communications. In addition to these capabilities, we also use a wide range of tools to constrain the ability of terrorists to act, for example working to proscribe organisations, freeze and seize their financial assets, and break up networks and associations in prison.” Even before the effort was launched, the report noted the government had contained “approximately 700 prisoners… who have been identified as engaged in terrorism or extremism, or about whom there are extremism concerns.”

Incarcerating would-be terrorists was also excluded from the panel discussion at the United Nations.


In summary, the UN forum was devoid of mentioning Islamic extremism, keeping terrorist in prisons at home and abroad, and blamed disinformation on the Internet for spawning attacks rather than actual grievances from a warped ideology.

It also did not mention acceding to terrorists’ demands which the United Kingdom may have already done, such as abandoning the fight on Islamic terror, whether ISIL, Taliban, al Shabab and Boko Haram, and resuscitating terrorist groups like Hamas.

The United Nations panelists on counter-terrorism did not speak openly, honestly or comprehensively about various approaches countries have implemented to tackle the global scourge and opted instead to parrot politically correct non-controversial narratives. Perhaps honest dialogues exist in private but the public spectacle of the UN is a ghostly version of reality.

Related articles:

The Global Intifada

The Current Intifada against Everyone

The Epicenters, Diameter and Echoes of 9/11

Trends in Anti-Muslim and Anti-Semitic Attacks Post-9/11

I See Dead People

I’m Offended, You’re Dead

The Insidious Jihad in America

The Banners of Jihad

Pick Your Jihad; Choose Your Infidel

Grading Evil and Evil Doers

The Terrorism Of Emasculated Palestinians

The United Nations met this week to discuss counter-terrorism. One of the discussions focused on a left-wing term-of-art called “masculinities” and its need to be studied and addressed in the field of terrorism. Specifically, a 90-minute discussion called “Bridging the gap: Connecting research, policy and practice on masculinities to more effectively counter terrorism and prevent and counter violent extremism” urged the UN and members states to tackle the issue of “toxic masculinity” and how it is used to draw recruits to terrorism.

At 1:18:15 of the talk, Sanam Naraghi Anderlini of the International Civil Society Action Network spoke via Zoom. She described the work she did on behalf of the UN to explore the role that “toxic masculinity” played in terrorism in ten countries. It was an interesting question to ask a women who runs a women’s peace organization, as she focused her work on “what does it mean to be a man? Whether in Liberia, Nigeria, Palestine, Jamaica, Yemen, Syria, Iraq.”

Sanam Naraghi Anderlini

Anderlini contended that four themes emerged in each country as critical elements for male self-definition and worth, the 4 “Ps”: Provide, Protect, Prestige and Procreation. She argued that men living in societies where they failed in their “manly” roles to provide for the family monetarily, to protect them, to have a position of prestige or power, or to procreate and have progeny, were easy prey for radical actors. People like radical jihadis tap into the male aggrieved status and advance the idea that their religion is greater than all others and the pathway to power and prestige is to protect their families and communities via violence.

In regards to Palestinian Arabs, the fourth “p”, to “provide”, is addressed by the Palestinian Authority’s “martyr payments” in their infamous pay-to-slay program.

It’s a peculiar lens to examine the Palestinian Arab-Israeli Conflict, as not being about two people fighting a century-old civil war over a small stretch of land, but of emasculated Arabs being played by their leaders.

And by others.

Anderlini added that “the Islamists, the jihadi movements, that are around didn’t appear out of nowhere. They’ve been funded since the 1990s by UN member states like Saudi Arabia or Wahabi movements that come out of our member states…. These boys and these young men aren’t born violent. They are being exploited by and for powerful elites.”

She is right about funds coming from Muslim countries to Palestinian Arabs to kill Jews. Iran, Iraq and Saudi Arabia all sent monies to Palestinian Arabs who murdered Jews during the Second Intifada. Qatar and Turkey back the political-terrorist group Hamas, which has a foundational charter calling for the slaughter of Jews.

If a key feature of Jihadi terrorism is emasculated Muslims being preyed upon by powerful leaders, then cutting off the funding and providing young Muslim men with better role models is seemingly a key pathway to stopping the systemic violence.

ACTION ITEM

EMAIL THE WHITE HOUSE “It is time to cut off funding to countries that fund violent extremism such as the Palestinian Authority, Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey. The Middle East is in terrible need of better role models to promote peace and coexistence.”

Members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee:

EMAIL SEN. CHRIS MURPHY (D-CT)

Sen. Bob Menendez (D-NJ)
Sen. Ben Cardin (D-MD)
Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH)
Sen. Christopher A. Coons (D-DE)
Sen. Tim Kaine (D-VA)
Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-OR)
Sen. Cory A. Booker (D-NJ)
Sen. Brian Schatz (D-HI)
Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD)
Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-IL)
Sen. James Risch (R-ID)
Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL)
Sen. Mitt Romney (R-UT)
Sen. Pete Ricketts (R-NE)
Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY)
Sen. Todd Young (R-IN)
Sen. John Barrasso (R-WY)
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX)
Sen. Bill Hagerty (R-TN)
Sen. Tim Scott (R-SC)

Related articles:

The Proud Fathers of Palestinian Terrorists

The Humiliation of Palestinian Terrorists Standing in Line to Receive Martyr Payments

Israelis Targeting Terrorists, Palestinians Targeting Civilians

Mother’s Day And Ahlam Al-Tamimi

Palestinian Post-paid Terrorism

Woke Statistics From The United Nations

Letter to Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT) On Conditioning Aid To Israel

Spreading “Cheer” of Attacking Israeli Jews

Palestinians Want Their Young Girls To Become Terrorists

The Collective Punishment Of Terrorism

The United Nations is holding its 2023 Counter-Terrorism Week from June 19 to 23. It is an annual ritual held since 2001 which attempts to combat the violence plaguing many parts of the world.

Some countries like the United Kingdom spoke about terrorism being bred inside its borders, while others like those in Africa, noted that “the spill-over of terrorism from the Sahel to the northern regions of the West African coastal countries is no longer a risk; it is a reality.”

A few speakers spoke of “lone wolves” who become radicalized online in just days, as opposed to fifty years ago when it took months or years of planning by organized groups to commit an attack. Few commented that terrorism has become more institutionalized, capturing the attention and intoxicating academia.

The overall theme was that terrorism is not uniform but all of the countries fear its impact in the near and longer term.

So various nations came together to figure out how to prevent the scourge through the exchange of ideas, best practices and sharing of information. Topics ranged from stopping the flow of weapons and blocking financing for violent groups, to building forums for inclusivity and preventing poverty.

The UN said little about the appropriate penalties for terrorism. The global body relies on its “four pillars for combatting terrorism,” three of which are prophylactic and the fourth, a wrapper of respecting human rights.

It is a monstrous hole in its strategy, atop failed prescriptions, such as the notion that fighting poverty prevents terrorism which has been disproven in multiple studies.

At present, the UN relies on organizations like Investigative Team to Promote Accountability for Crimes Committed by Da’esh/ISIL (UNITAD) which tracks crimes committed by ISIL to be prosecuted at some point. The UN operates with a courtroom framework, and does nothing to advocate physically turning back the scourge.

It leaves the agency as unsullied, with an easy perch to admonish those who live in terrorism’s trenches of park benches.

Israel has faced Palestinian Arab terrorism since modern Zionism took root in the Jewish holy land in the 1920s. Instigated and rewarded by its leaders to this day, Palestinian individuals shoot, stab and run over innocent Israeli Jews because they object to the basic presence of these non-Arabs.

Israel takes a number of preventative measures to stop the terrorism, some within the UN playbook and others outside. It tries to stop the flow of weapons and financing to terrorist groups, while it also facilitates the flow of people and goods to help the local Palestinian economy.

However, that is not enough to stem the daily barrage. Israel actively monitors terrorists and launches raids to arrest them before the attacks. It punishes the terrorist by destroying their home, an action the United Nations condemns as “collective punishment” for the terrorist’s family.

Lost in the rebuke is acknowledging that terrorism is inherently a collective attack on a community, not just the parties personally injured. A proportionate response to terrorism must, therefore, include accounting for those who aided and abetted the crime.

Related articles:

The United Nations Ignores Radical Muslim Violent Extremism and Terrorism

Collective Guilt / Collective Punishment

Will The UN Ever Support Israel Addressing Terrorism And Violent Extremism?

UN Doesn’t Like ‘Proportionate’ Israeli Reaction To Arab Terror Either

Pray for a Lack of “Proportionately” in Numbers. There will never be an Equivalence of Intent.

Nexus of Terrorism Hypocrisy: UN, Qatar and Hamas

CNN Sanitizes Palestinian Car Ramming Terrorism

Beheadings are Not Terrorism for Al Jazeera

Why Blockade Gaza

Palestinian Post-paid Terrorism

There’s Nothing Worse Than Terrorism in France

The UN Fails on its Own Measures to address the Conditions Conducive to the Spread of Terrorism

Palestinians Seek Mercy For Being a Menace

Alternatives for Punishing Dead Terrorists

UNCircumcized Trademark

Satire.

Many people waited for the United States Supreme Court to rule on a case of trademark infringement before leaping into the market with their own parody products. The case involved a dog toy named ‘Bad Spaniels’ that mimicked Jack Daniel’s Whiskey. The justices came back with a unanimous 9-0 ruling in favor of BS arguing that no one could possibly confuse a ‘poop-themed’ dog toy for the alcoholic beverage.

One of the first new products to hit store shelves was “U.N.Circumcized”, which sported the United Nations global body logo, with a tagline which offered “protection for the world’s bodies, except for Jews.”

Another person opted to open a store across the street from the United Nations called Hunter College Store for Jihad. It had highly flammable Israeli flags, a map of all Jewish institutions in America following the format of the Massachusetts Mapping Project, and several life-sized effigies in nooses with masks of various Jewish and Israeli personalities.

Lawyers doubted these would withstand scrutiny, as people associate the United Nations with rape and Hunter with Jew hatred.

Related articles:

“Protocols of the Elders of Zion – The Musical”

Ben & Jerry’s New Flavor: Milano Zio

Charlie Hebdo Will No Longer Sell Magazines to 20 Islamic Terrorist Groups

NY Times’ Sarah Jeong Guides Rep Ilhan Omar Tweets

Netanyahu’s Doctoral Thesis on the Nakba

Palestinian Job Fair for Peace

Palestinian Hate Speech

United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres delivered a message on March 30, 2023 related to the genocide against the Tutsis in Rwanda in 1994. He offered words for the whole world.

How easily hate speech — a key indicator of the risk of genocide — turns to hate crime.  How complacency in the face of atrocity is complicity.  And how no place, and no time is immune to danger — including our own.

UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres

Unfortunately, the global body – as well as many countries and people – turn a blind eye to the rampant hate speech in Palestinian society.

On May 15, 2023, the United Nations gave a platform to the acting President of the Palestinian Authority, Mahmoud Abbas. The man who wrote his doctoral thesis on Holocaust denial gave a master class in antisemitism.

Abbas claimed that Jews have no history in the Jewish historical homeland. He said that Jews never even had a single temple in Jerusalem.

Abbas said that Jews were implanted into the land of Israel by the British and Americans who wanted to export the Jews which they despised. He argued that doing so made the Jews indebted to their western benefactors to serve as a colonial outpost.

Abbas called the Jews a bunch of liars – on par with Nazi Germany’s propagandist Joseph Goebbels, who was instrumental in the genocide of European Jewry.

Abbas’s performance was a reminder of his past antisemitic tirades when he praised the Arab assassins of Jewish civilians, calling them “martyrs” for the Palestinian cause, who will always get pay-to-slay money, even “if we had only a penny left.

Horrifically, the United Nations was not “complacent in the face of these atrocities” but an active participant.

The UN continues to give the Palestinian leader the floor to air his antisemitic vitriol. It continues to push money into the terrorist enclave of Gaza, headed by Hamas, with the most antisemitic governing charter ever written. The global forum echoes Palestinians’ demands for apartheid, denying Jews the basic right to pray at their holiest location on the Jewish Temple Mount, and to live in the center of their holy land.

Palestinian hate speech was once again given a platform at the United Nations, inflaming danger to Jews everywhere, and “the risk of genocide.”

Seemingly by design.

Related articles:

Abbas’s Speech and the Window into Antisemitism and Anti-Zionism

United Nations’ Particularism About Racism But Universalism On Anti-Semitism Reveals Its Jew Hatred

The United Nations Ignores Radical Muslim Violent Extremism and Terrorism

Apartheid In Palestinian Authority, Not Israel

Amid The Terror, The United Nations Elevates Hamas

To Serve Jews, United Nations Style

The U.N. Openly Declares Opposition To Jews in Jerusalem

While Palestinians Fire 400 Rockets, the United Nations Meets to Give Them Money

Abbas’ European Audience for His Rantings

The United Nations’ Incitement to Violence

What’s “Outrageous” for the United Nations

“Mainstream” and Abbas’ Jihad

Abbas Knows Racism

Imagine You Were Abbas, Giving A Speech To The United Nations

Acting President of the Palestinian Authority, Mahmoud Abbas, was lucky enough to be given a platform at the United Nations on May 15, 2023 to discuss the 75th anniversary of what Palestinians call the “Nakba,” the events surrounding the formation of Israel in which Arabs first rejected Jews being given any part of Palestine and then lost a war to destroy Israel. At war’s end, Israel denied admitting roughly 700,000 Palestinian Arabs who had left the fighting area while they waited for the Jewish State to be destroyed by five invading Arab armies. It was the first time that the United Nations held such event, and Abbas was given the floor to address the global body.

If you were in Abbas’ shoes, you probably would have prepared and rehearsed a compelling speech of 25 to 30 minutes, meant to draw support for your positions.

You would have thanked the world for forming UNRWA, a distinct body only for Palestine refugees, funded at levels far more than every other actual refugee fleeing wars overseen by UNHCR. Such appreciation would hopefully make the generous sponsors continue to fund their perennial Arab wards.

You would have relayed the refugee situation in a sympathetic light, as people who have benefited from the work of several UN agencies but still long for citizenship, whether in a new state of Palestine or in Israel.

You would have described the desire for coexistence with the Jewish State. In evidence of such, you might have shown empathy with Jews to show sincerity of living together in peace.

Abbas did none of these things.

He actually did the exact opposite.

Abbas rambled to the audience for roughly an hour, seemingly without care that he lost the crowd’s attention early on.

He lied about the Palestinian Arabs, saying that they were descendants of Canaanites when it is common knowledge that ARABS came from ARABIA in the seventh and eighth centuries as part of the Muslim invasion of the Middle East and North Africa. He said that roughly 1 million Arabs became refugees due to Israel’s wars in 1948 and 1967, when the commonly used figures range from 700,000 to 750,000 (even though those figures are often doubted). Why exaggerate the Arab position to undermine your credibility?

Rather than thank the United States and the United Kingdom for billions of dollars in aid donated to Palestinians over the decades, Abbas blamed them for launching a “colonial” implant in Palestine and demanded an apology.

Rather than portraying the Palestinians as ready for peace, Abbas declared that Jews have no history in the holy land and the Jewish temples never existed in Jerusalem – as if billions of Christians never read the bible.

Rather than talking about homes in Israel that had belonged to Arabs, he talked about towns that no longer existed and were replaced with forests and parks.

Mahmoud Abbas sporting a key on his lapel as if he owns a home in Israel and is ready to move in, addressing the United Nations in May 2023

Rather than display an understanding of international law and argue in a consistent fashion, Abbas argued both sides of UNGA Resolutions 181 and 194, saying that it was wrong and unlawful for foreign countries to create a Jewish State in Palestine and to make Greater Bethlehem and Greater Jerusalem a holy basin under international rule on one hand, but on the other hand Israel should be forced to admit the descendants of refugees per the same resolution.

Most tellingly, Abbas ignored the key phrase in UNGA Res. 194 Article 11 which conditioned any return of refugees or compensation to be based on the Arabs’ willingness “to live at peace with their neighbors [in Israel].” Abbas’ various slanders against Israel – including calling Jews Nazi-like – made clear to everyone that Palestinians deserve absolutely nothing.

Abbas comparing Jews to Nazis, the people who committed a genocide against them, a heinous antisemitic comparison.

Abbas squandered an opportunity to show himself a statesman, with the ability to forge peace with Israel. Instead, he showcased why the majority of Palestinian Arabs want him to resign and consider the Palestinian Authority to be a corrupt burden on their lives.

The only people who stayed for Abbas’s disgraceful speech were die-hard Palestinian supporters, and even they must have cringed at the performance. Unless they also see the pathway to a Palestinian State as trampling upon the sovereignty of a member state by a raging antisemite.

ACTION ITEM

EMAIL REP. JAMAAL BOWMAN (NY16) “Mahmoud Abbas’s vile display of antisemitism at the ‘Nakba Day’ event at the UN made readily apparent the unwillingness of Palestinians to ‘live in peace with Israel’, and negates any supposed rights of descendants of refugees to move into Israel.”

Related articles:

Abbas’s Speech and the Window into Antisemitism and Anti-Zionism

Abbas’ European Audience for His Rantings

Mahmoud Abbas’s Particular Anti-Zionist Holocaust Denial

Does the UN Only Grant Inalienable Rights to Palestinians?

The Anti-Semitism In Anti-Zionism

Abbas Declares All of Israel is a “Painful Settlement”

“Mainstream” and Abbas’ Jihad

Abbas Knows Racism

There Is No Backing For A Palestinian “Right Of Return”

The United Nations Applauds Abbas’ Narrative

Gazans Support Killing Jewish Civilians

The United Nations Can Hear the Songs of Gazans, but Cannot See Their Rockets

United Nations’ Particularism About Racism But Universalism On Anti-Semitism Reveals Its Jew Hatred

On March 23, 2023, United Nations Secretary General Antonio Gutteres published a message for the International Day of Remembrance of the Victims of Slavery and the Transatlantic Slave Trade, to be observed on March 25th. Gutteres focused on the “evil enterprise of enslavement [that] lasted for over 400 years… of suffering and barbarity that shows humanity at its worst.” He focused on the European slavery of Africans, stating that one can “draw a straight line from the centuries of colonial exploitation to the social and economic inequalities of today. And we can recognize the racist tropes popularized to rationalize the inhumanity of the slave trade in the white supremacist hate that is resurgent today.”

Secretary-General Antonio Guterres speaks during the High Level Segment of the 37th Session of the Human Rights Council. 26 February 2018.

While modern slavery exists to this day – much of it the enslavement of Black youths in Africa as soldiers and laborers for Black adults in Angola, Togo, Benin and Nigeria – the U.N. leader focused narrowly on “white supremacist hate” for Africans that was rooted in 400 years of the slave trade. The particularism of Remembrance is for Black victims of White racism, nothing else.

It is interesting to contrast this approach with Gutteres’ statement honoring the victims of the Holocaust, in which Nazi Germany and its allies nearly completed the ethnic cleansing of Jews in Europe.

The title of the United Nations story about Holocaust Remembrance Day was “Honouring Holocaust victims, U.N. chief Guterres pledges to battle anti-Semitism, all forms of hatred.” The lead-in sentence continued that theme, that “the world has a duty to remember that the Holocaust was a systematic attempt to eliminate the Jewish people and so many others.

A recap of Gutteres’ video remarks noted that “the Holocaust was the culmination of millennia of hatred, scapegoating and discrimination targeting the Jews, what we now call anti-Semitism, he emphasized, adding that tragically and contrary to the international community’s resolve, anti-Semitism continues to thrive. Moreover, the world is also witnessing a deeply troubling rise in extremism, xenophobia, racism and anti-Muslim hatred. Irrationality and intolerance are back, said the U.N. chief.” He further said “that as Secretary-General of the United Nations, I will be in the frontline of the battle against anti-Semitism and all other forms of hatred.

The U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights, Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein also offered thoughts about the Holocaust that the “sadistic brutality of the atrocities inflicted by the Nazi regime on Jews, Roma, Slavs, persons with disabilities, political dissidents, homosexuals and others was nourished by layer upon layer of propaganda, falsifications and incitement to hatred.” He added that “is crucial to maintain respect for human rights, especially in respect of the right to life and wellbeing of all people regardless of their origin or ethnicity,… [and that] education must be at the core of all efforts to combat anti-Semitism, racism, and all forms of discrimination.”

The speakers were very holistic and all-encompassing as it related to the genocide of Jews.

While the United Nations solely focused on White slavery of Blacks and drew a line across centuries straight to racism against Blacks by Whites today, it opted for a completely different storyline for the slaughter of Jews. For the Holocaust of just some decades ago – as Survivors still scream in their sleep – the UN chose to include many non-Jewish people in the Remembrance, and attributed the barbarism to broad-based xenophobia which manifests itself in broad-based extremism like anti-Muslim hatred today.

It’s repulsive and shocking. And not shocking.

For the U.N., White racism against Blacks is systemic and persistent, while anti-Semitism is neither special nor unique; a subset of other forms of hatred which much also be addressed. The mantra is that over 1 billion Black people suffer persecution as a targeted minority, while the same cannot be said of 15 million Jews.

The divide in Victims of Preference is also prevalent in the United States. The leaders of congress took a knee for Black Lives Matter but would not condemn anti-Semitism unless coupled with other forms of discrimination like anti-Muslim hatred, to protect an anti-Semitic Muslim congresswoman.

Ilhan Omar and Nancy Pelosi (photo: Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

There is no more persecuted group in the world than the Jews. The hatred is so embedded in society, that world leaders do not call it out clearly, uniquely and unapologetically, because they have internalized the venom. The audience doesn’t want to hear it, and leaders don’t really want to talk much about it, as the straight line from the Holocaust to today runs through the radical jihadist Palestinian Arabs and anti-Zionists seeking to destroy the Jewish State.

In woke narrative, perpetrators can only by White Christian Males and victims are anyone else. So when society opts to define Jews as White (they are actually multi-racial), the Holocaust gets subtly reconfigured as a story of broad-based xenophobia which caught Jews alongside confirmed capital-V Victims by White Nazis. When Jews today are clearly targeted by non-Whites, the story is either ignored (like New York City Mayor Bill DeBlasio and The New York Times) or the hatred is whitewashed because Jews deserved it as “interlopers” (as defined by Blacks in Jersey City) or “colonialists” (as concocted by anti-Zionists).

We are being reeducated by progressive powers that believe Jews are over-represented in power structures cloaked in their Whiteness. The woke become incensed when Jews claim victimhood, and spin the Holocaust into a crime against righteous Victims – homosexuals, the disabled and Muslims – which also caught Jews in the broad net.

The particular stand against racism is as correct as the universalistic stance against Jew-hatred-plus is wrong. Pathetic Holocaust Remembrances and watered down denouncements of anti-Semitism are facilitating the noxious evil, as the neo Nazis and jihadists know an opening when they see it.

Related articles:

Anti-Semitism Is Harder to Recognize Than Racism

The Holocaust and the Nakba

The Re-Introduction of the ‘Powerful’ Jew Smear

The United Nations Ignores Radical Muslim Violent Extremism and Terrorism

The Anti-Semitism In Anti-Zionism

A Unique Evil: Jenin And Holocaust Remembrance Day

The UN Cannot See Palestinian ‘Lies and Loathing’

Excerpt of Hamas Charter to Share with Your Elected Officials

Quantifying the Values of Gazans

What do you Recognize in the Palestinians?

It’s the Democracy, Stupid

UN Secretary General Guterres is Losing the Confidence of Decent People

80 Years After Wannsee Conference, Arab/Muslim Anti-Semitism Dominates

Hamas’s Willing Executioners

‘The Maiming of the Jew’

Bigots In Power, Checked And Unchecked

Woke Statistics From The United Nations

‘Wokeness’, the idea that problems are rooted in ‘toxic masculinity’, ‘male chauvinism’ and ‘White privilege’ is becoming mainstreamed, even at the United Nations. The secretary-general, himself a White and Christian male, has comically tried to discuss it using statistics.

On March 13, 2023, UNSG Antonio Gutteres gave remarks to the Women’s Civil Society Town Hall in New York, in which he rejected ‘Male Chauvinist’ domination of the technology sector, and called for an overhaul of ‘Patriarchal Structures’. His examples were problematic at their core.

Consider Gutters’ comment about the war in Ukraine: “and while men still largely make those decisions, women and girls often pay the price. Ninety percent of refugees from the war in Ukraine are women and their children.” He said that men make the decisions to go to war but that women and their children pay the price.

Firstly, the children are not just the women’s children but of the men as well. Secondly and critically, the women are the refugees because they get to leave the fighting area. All Ukrainian men between 18 and 60 years old have been forced to remain and fight the Russians. While there are significantly more women than men in Ukraine, it is the men – many older – who are left to fight against the large Russian army.

Yet the United Nations flips the suffering to the women who are afforded the ability to flee to safety.

Gutteres made similarly ridiculous comments about the COVID-19 pandemic when he said “The COVID-19 pandemic is far from over for women who lost their jobs, and girls who lost their chance of education. The cost-of-living crisis is hitting women and girls first and worst.” The basic fact is that men LOST THEIR LIVES while women lost their jobs. The death rate for men in the pandemic was 1.6 times that of women.

Yet the United Nations flipped the pain to the women who survived in much greater numbers than men.

This was akin to Gutteres rebuking rich and White European countries for prioritizing administering vaccines during the pandemic to their own citizens, sayingI am particularly concerned about the African continent.we must tackle the devastating social and economic dimensions of this crisis, with a focus on those most affected: women, older persons, youth.” But barely anyone from the African continent died from COVID. It was mostly older White men, not Black women. (As of this writing, there were 15 deaths per million in Nigeria, compared to 5,076 per million in Hungary). Who was really most affected?

It’s amazing what can be done with selectively choosing statistics to burnish a particular narrative.

And the leader of the United Nations has a very specific and woke narrative: “Many of the challenges we face today — from conflicts to climate chaos to the cost-of-living crisis — are the result of a male-dominated world with a male-dominated culture, taking the key decisions that guide our world. And while men still largely make those decisions, women and girls often pay the price.” Men only do harm. They don’t contribute to the good of society – developing vaccines, building infrastructure, providing security, etc. – they are simply the cause of problems.

And the women suffer from this “male-dominated world with a male-dominated culture.”

The wokester-in-chief is offering simplistic and deceptive lines of toxic misandry which are making people angry at the growing extreme left-wing infecting politics and culture. The reaction to these smears is sometimes to elect the very right-wing misogynists that Gutteres is calling out, to stem the tidal wave of male criticism.

Secretary General of the United Nations, Antonio Gutteres

There are good and bad men and women, as well as good and bad White and Black people. Those are simple facts. The vilification of one group over-and-again has names – racism, sexism, ageism, etc. – and politicians must stop fanning the flames of hatred and division.

Related articles:

NY Times, NY Times, What Do You See? It Sees Rich White Males

Vote Purple

Lunatics To Love And Loathe

On Accepting and Rejecting Donations

When Only Republicans Trust the Police

In The Margins

The Misogyny of Treating Women like Victims

Coexistence Runs Through UAE, Anti-Semitism Through UN

The Abraham Accords struck between Israel and several Arab Muslim countries including the United Arab Emirates (U.A.E.), Bahrain, Sudan and Morocco in 2020, have continued to advance the cause of peaceful coexistence.

On February 20, 2023, the U.A.E. invited many Jewish guests to be part of the opening ceremony of the first new synagogue in a Muslim country in generations. The Moses Ben Maimon Synagogue is part of the multi-faith Abrahamic Family House complex in Abu Dhabi which also includes a mosque and a church. The three places of worship sit beside one another in an effort to show harmony between the different faiths.

Beyond the proximity of each house of worship, the architects took care in designing each building: the mosque faces the Islamic holy city of Mecca, the church faces east towards the rising sun, and the synagogue faces Jerusalem, Judaism’s holist city.

Abrahamic Family Complex in Abu Dhabi, UAE

On that same February day, the United Nations took the polar opposite approach towards religious coexistence as the U.N. Security Council issued a statement condemning Jews and Judaism.

The official statement was a litany of complaints on the presence of Jews in their holy land. It expressed “strong opposition” to Jews building homes east of the 1949 Armistice Lines (E49AL). It condemned Israel’s killing Islamic terrorists planning attacks on Jewish civilians. It demanded that Jews continue to be forbidden from praying at the holiest site on the Jewish Temple Mount. And it urged that Jews and Christians take a backseat to Muslims when the holidays of Ramadan, Easter and Passover overlap this year, prioritizing Muslim access to Jerusalem over believers of the other faiths.

Remarkably, the “most right-wing government in Israeli history” as portrayed in the media, acquiesced to the anti-Semitic proposals. The Israeli government said that it would keep the “status quo” of banning Jewish prayer on the Temple Mount and would ban Jews from the site during the last ten days of Ramdan. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu also reportedly told the United States that it won’t authorize new Jewish towns in E49AL for the next few months and will limit incursions into Palestinian Authority towns to arrest terrorists.

While the United Arab Emirates works for religious coexistence, the United Nations works to foment religious animosity and segregation. If there’s a future for peace and coexistence in the region, it will run through the U.A.E. and not the U.N..

Related articles:

The United Nations and Holy Sites in the Holy Land

The UN’s Disinterest in Jewish Rights at Jewish Holy Places

The Arab Spring Blooms in the UAE

“Palestinians and Israelis Alike are Experiencing Growing Insecurity, Growing Fear in Their Places of Worship”

The Inalienable Right of Jews to Pray on The Temple Mount

The U.N. Openly Declares Opposition To Jews in Jerusalem

The United Nations has summarized its thoughts about Jews in Jerusalem, and it’s appalling.

On February 12, 2023, UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres sent a message to a conference held in Cairo, Egypt called “Supporting the City of Jerusalem and its Population.” By the term “its Population,” the leader of the UN made clear he only supports the Arab Muslim population, not the Jewish one. He admitted as much in his opening statement about the “challenges faced by the Palestinian population in Jerusalem.” Presumably, the term Palestinian population refers to those Arabs who have not opted to take Israeli citizenship which has been offered to all law-abiding Arabs in the city.

It clearly didn’t mean Jews.

Guterres continued:

Jerusalem — Al-Quds is not only a treasured home for so many — it also holds a unique place in the hearts of millions of Muslims, Jews and Christians the world over.

Jerusalem is ONLY the holiest city for Jews. Minimizing the Jewish connection to the city after an opening comment showing unique concern for the challenges of non-Jews, reveals the jaundiced mindset of the global leader.

As we have seen time and again, what happens in Jerusalem reverberates globally — and tensions, incitement and violence often spill into wider instability.

Jews have been a majority in Jerusalem since the 1860s. However, the Jordanian Army ethnically cleansed the Jews out of the eastern portion of Jerusalem including the entirety of the the Old City, and forbade Jews from even visiting their holy sites from 1949 to 1967. The world remained completely silent about the abuse to Jewish human rights, even in the shadow of the European genocide of Jews.

Now, Jews once again control the eastern portion of Jerusalem after Israel defended itself from the attacking Jordanian army in 1967. The current Jewish presence sickens the anti-Semitic Arab Muslims who shout that “al Aqsa is in danger.” Outrageously, the United Nations echoes their sentiments, further inflaming the region.

It is therefore imperative that all parties exercise restraint and refrain from provocations, inflammatory actions and rhetoric.  I am very concerned by the unilateral initiatives that we have seen in recent weeks.

Refraining “from provocations, inflammatory actions and rhetoric” makes perfect sense. Unfortunately, the head of the U.N. has a perverse idea of what that constitutes, as can be seen in his next comment.

The position of the United Nations is clear:  The status of Jerusalem cannot be altered by unilateral actions, including settlement activities in occupied East Jerusalem; it can only be resolved through negotiations between the parties.

Perhaps the U.N. does not accept Israel’s annexation of the eastern portion of Jerusalem, as the global body had sought that Greater Jerusalem and Greater Bethlehem be held under an international regime in the 1947 Partition Plan. But the Jordanians drastically altered the character of the city when it expelled every Jew, destroyed every synagogue, banned Jews from entering the city, illegally annexed it and granted any non-Jew citizenship. Reversing the anti-Semitic Jordanian actions is not altering the city with “unilateral actions, including settlement activities”, but reestablishing the Jewish presence in the Jewish holy city that had been unilaterally destroyed by the anti-Semitic Jordanian regime.

While Israel tries to establish a final resolution to the Arab-Israel conflict, it is absurd to demand that the city be frozen in time – only as it relates to Jews and to that period when Jews were ethnically cleansed. It is the capital city of Israel with an enormous demand for housing. How can the U.N. advocate for Arab housing in the city but not for Jewish homes?

Jerusalem’s demographic and historical character must be preserved — and the status quo at the Holy Sites must be upheld, in line with the special role of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan.

If Jerusalem has been 75% Jewish in 2020, 2000, 1980, 1960 or 1940, is that the fixed percentage of the demographic character of the city that must be preserved? No city in the world has a fixed demographic character. To suggest that the demographic and historical character should relate to the eighteen years that Jordan banned the presence of Jews would be an endorsement of ethnic cleansing.

Which is what Guterres seems to have done, in calling for the anti-Semitic Jordanians to have a special role “at the Holy Sites.” The Jordanian Waqf ONLY has a special role in regards to Muslim holy sites such as the al Aqsa Mosque. It has no special role on the overall Temple Mount which is a Jewish holy site. In falsely giving the Waqf a greater role than was agreed upon in the 1994 Peace Agreement between Israel and Jordan, the U.N. chief is inflaming the situation and going directly against his own words: ignoring an agreement reached between the parties.

The United Nations remains committed to help Israelis and Palestinians chart a credible path forward:  Towards an end of the occupation; towards two States living side by side with Jerusalem as the capital of both; towards lasting security, peace and dignity for all.  Thank you.  Shukran.

All of Guterres’ comments show a disregard for Jewish Israelis, so the call out of helping Israelis is a polite lie thinly spread on a mountain of scorn.

  • There is no “occupation” in Jerusalem. It was never Palestinian nor was it ever intended to be part of an Arab state, but part of an international “corpus separatum.”
  • The Arabs have flatly rejected a two State solution in every poll and every peace negotiation.
  • If the parties are to negotiate a solution between themselves, then declaring the outcome of Jerusalem being a shared capital undermines the very principle of negotiation. The parties themselves will determine what they find acceptable.
  • Note that Israel has already advanced the sharing of Corpus Separatum, when it handed Bethlehem to the Palestinian Authority in 1996. The sharing of the holy basin has already been accomplished.
  • If the U.N. cared about security, it would support Israel in fighting terror, which it does for every country in the world other than Israel.
  • If the U.N. cared about Jewish dignity, it would INSIST upon Jewish prayer rights on the Jewish Temple Mount, not calling for banning Jews.

The head of the United Nations called for banning Jews from the Old City of Jerusalem and denying them basic human rights and dignity to pray at their holiest location. He has sadly become an ugly tool of radical jihadists, and an enemy of Jews.

The U.N.’s desire to impose sharia law in Jerusalem offers no justice nor dignity for Jews. The agency has broken its social contract with the Jewish State, and its heartless shell is but a conduit for overt anti-Semitism.

Related articles:

The United Nations’ Adoption of Palestinians, Enables It to Only Find Fault With Israel

The Left-Wing’s Two State Solution: 1.5 States for Arabs, 0.5 for Jews

The UN Talks About Jews Building In Jerusalem On Chanukah

Evicting 70,000 Dead Settlers From Jerusalem

Jerusalem, Israel. One and Only

The UN on the Status of Jerusalem

Jerusalem Population Facts

Will the UN Demand a Halt to Arabs Moving to Jerusalem?

The Green Line Through Jerusalem

“Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem”

The Remarkable Tel Jerusalem

The Jews of Jerusalem In Situ

Ending Apartheid in Jerusalem

I call BS: You Never Recognized Jerusalem as Israel’s Capital

Arabs in Jerusalem

The Arguments over Jerusalem

The anthem of Israel is JERUSALEM

Jerusalem, and a review of the sad state of divided capitals in the world